Stan Meyers Secret, Preventing Electrolysis.

[tutanka]

Ok ma da quello che so, l'alternatore senza il regolatore, anche se c'e ancora il diodo si trasformerebbe in un PMA che dovrebbe una volta superato il voltaggio minimo per passare la corrente attraverso l'acqua tutto il voltaggio eccedente sarebbe trasformato in amperaggio. é sbagliata questa affermazione?

Poi nel tuo caso generavi il h2 + o2 insieme vero?
Io vorrei generargli separatamente... Cè una differenza no?

Nel mio caso sarebbero diversi elettrodi in parallelo...

Grazie

Per la separazione dei due gas la cosa migliore è utilizzare una fuel cell reverse, in una cell standard è impossibile avere la separazione in quanto l'idrogeno elettropositivo con l'ossigeno elettronegativo si ricombinano velocemente formando quello che tutti chiamano HHO. Questo non è vapore ma uno stadio di trasformazione successivo. Quindi lo possiamo chiamare propriamente "water gas", gas infiammabile dal basso potere calorifico. Il limite del water gas è che la sua formula è reverse cioè si ritrasforma sempre in acqua. Questo come sai è molto pericoloso all'interno di un motore, dopo varie prove ti posso assicurare che il water gas devasta internamente qualsiasi motore. Per questo la necessità di creare una nuovo gruppo di molecole con un potere calorifico superiore e con la proprietà di non rovinare un motore ma di essere un cleaner. L'azoto , presente nella nostra atmosfera in grande quantità, ci aiuta alla formazione di NH3 e N2O. Queste due molecole possono essere compresse all'interno di un motore ma quello che è piu importante è che miscelate insieme si comportano come un esplosivo con un potere calorifico di circa 3 volte rispetto alla benzina, pertanto utilizzando la miscela NH3/N2O occorre aggiungere extra azoto (e non aria) per diminuire questo potere distruttivo. Puoi creare queste molecole in due modi; utilizzando celle HHO senza elettrolita (come inizialmente ha fatto meyer) con una camera di trasformazione aggiuntiva oppure creare un "risuonatore" che trasforma direttamente l'azoto e acqua premiscelati in NH3/N2O. Per arrivare a comprendere quest'ultimo stadio ti consiglio di leggere gli studi del Dr. Harold Aspden. Saluti Alessandro

[lamare]

If the science can be explained and bears out, fair enough, great. However, if the science cannot be explained, is full of holes or simply fails to add up and make any real sense, then I tend to treat it with great caution. Unlike many people I'm simply uncomfortable living in a fantasy world.

Couldn't agree more. However, if you want to be able to explain the science, you will have to consider all options and continue to do so until you find the answer to what is really going on.

With respect to polarized dielectrics being able to charge a capacitor and hence form a free energy source that can be utilized, this appears to be not the answer to Meyer's secret. While this is a real energy source, it is a slow process, because the charge carriers must drift trough the dielectric from one capacitor plate to the other.

However, a couple of days ago, I re-analysed Gray's system:
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post108329

When you reduce the schematic to the basic principle, you get this:
http://www.energeticforum.com/attach...ay_circuit.pdf

The key is that when you resonate a coil that can be considered to be open at both sides, you get high voltage, zero current at the terminals. And since you can manipulate the electric field for free, you can energize the coil (almost) for free, hence you get free energy you can use.

However, if you split this same coil into two, you get high current in the middle, while at the same time still high voltage, zero current at the open end.
You can use that current for free, even though the resonance frequency of the loaded coils will be a bit different. Still, you remain with high voltage, low current at the outer ends.

Then take a look at figure 1 in Puharich's stuff, the signal generator block diagram (page 3):
http://www.free-energy-info.com/PatE7.pdf
Andrija Puharich: Water Decomposition by AC Elecrolysis >

There you see that L1 and L2 are driven from an open transformer and therefore no current flows in and out of the outer terminals of the whole train, which starts at the open end of the "insulating" TF and ends at the "resonance sensing" resistor.

However, what is interesting is the wave form in figure 15 at page 17:

Here he shows that the wave form is half rectified. What is important to realise is that he basically used unipolar pulses in one direction, but matched to the resonance frequency of the load train. If you look carefully at the lower wave form, you'll see that you can easily draw a sine wave across the tops of the high frequency waves. That is the wave that matches the resonance frequency of the load train. Very clever and elegant!

Now enter Stan Meyer:
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa....html#post7449

His circuit attempts to use the same principle:

However, he first of all used the wrong kind of transformer, a single secondary, and no feedback circuit to see wether the system is in resonance as well. While you can do without the feedback, without proper balancing as done by Puharich, it will be a nightmare to get working. That's why there's a "wiper arm" and a diode. So, if you want to experiment with this stuff and intend to get something working, do yourself a favour and drive your WFC the way Puharich does.

The sound card of a computer is perfectly capable of getting you the right kind of signal and a used audio amplifier can be had for very little money, so that would certainly be an option for driving the primary of the "insulation" coil.

A further improvement may be to not use the high current at L1 and L2 directly, but to make them into a transformer, a stransformer driven into resonance. Then you can use the power at the secondary without influencing the resonance train too much, especially since we have a conducting fluid in our resonance train, so the resonance frequency of the train may vary considerably, depending on the concentration of ions in the water, temperature, etc. And then you don't even consider what happens when you drive around with one of these in your trunk.

@Farrah: note that in actual fact, you get high current trough your WFC. So, there really is nothing unusual in the way the electrolysis is being done. All the analysis you can find all over the place suggesting this is a different kind of electrolysis are the result of a misinterpretation of what is resonating, or better, what delivers you the energy. Even though the ions and molecules are resonating along with the signal, this does not change one bit in the way the actual electrolysis is being done: driving a current trough conducting water. And once you have the proper amount of the right ions in your WFC, I don't think it's a surprise you can subsequently fill the WFC with "ordinary tap water", since the ions that make the electrolysis process work are just catalysts. However, if you want to prevent layers of Calcium carbonate to form on your electrodes, it may be a good idea to use water with a low concentration of Calcium carbonate.

Update:

As I posted here:
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post108528
Puharich does his half-wave rectification at the front. Before the amplifier. That basically means the circuit is not completely in balance and it takes a considerable amount of power to drive the "insulation transformer".

So, if you want to do this right, you have to do the half wave rectification at the back. That means you would have to feed the "insulation transformer" with the signal shown in the *upper* part of the figure. Then you place two sets of so-called AV plugs (basically half of a rectifier bridge) at the output of the "insulating transformer" to drive two *identical* sets of loads, such that you drive them the other way around with respect to one another. This way, you don't have to mistreat your amplifier driver, which really costs you a lot of power.

Update 2: There's one more detail to take care of. You have to sneak in a high pass filter. See:
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post108923

[Farrah Day]

In the self ionization process a hydrogen atom leaves one water molecule only to attach itself to another leaving H3O+ and OH-. This happens naturally and without any energy input . If a hydrogen atom can leave a water molecule without any input then what does this tell us about the strength of the covalent bond???

As far as the science, chemistry, and math to show the actual process I do not believe it exists...If it did don't you think we would be running on water right now?

In electrolysis the ions play a role in the process. But in Meyers process there is no charge exchange medium (thanks farrah day) for conventional electrolysis to occur. This is obviously a different process than anyone has seen before...If not it would have been figured out a long time ago.

So why not. Why can't an electric field cause the water molecule to seperate due to the opposite attractive forces? If there is no charge exchange medium isin't this our only other option?

HMS, self-ionisation of the water molecule happens naturally, but it is does require energy. However, as you rightly say, not necessarily external energy. A certain amount of energy exists within the water itself. Water is a strange substance, it's molecules are very mobile and continuously active on a molecular scale due to the polar interactions. So we have the kinetic energy of moving water molecules creating electric fields which on occasion add enough energy to another molecule to cause it to ionise. All this is pretty well accepted.

So I've always been of the opinion that we can further induce the water molecule to ionise for very little energy, and I'm still inclined to think this.

The problem then, is not inducing more ions. The problem (and something which the Dublin paper, Meyer and that patent link you posted all fail to address) is how to get these ions to become atoms. They are no good as ions, and if left, will simply reform into water molecule. How do you get a H+ ion to become a useful H atom? And here's the crunch, you have to provide it with an electron.

So where are you going to get an electron from?

This is where all the voltage theories simply fall apart, and why I'm always insisting that we need a charge exchange medium of some sort in the mix. If you take a look at my Closed-Loop Electrolyser concept, you will see how I'm trying to overcome this.

I continually struggle to understand how people expect the water molecule to simply become 2H and O in the prescence of an electric field!

[Farrah Day]

With respect to polarized dielectrics being able to charge a capacitor and hence form a free energy source that can be utilized, this appears to be not the answer to Meyer's secret. While this is a real energy source, it is a slow process, because the charge carriers must drift trough the dielectric from one capacitor plate to the other

Lamare, I don't believe that a polarised dielectric alone could charge a capacitor. The only way this could happen, as in the MIT experiment, is if there are active charges on the surface of the dielectric. Otherwise, even though the electrons in the plates of a capacitor would move with respect to the dielectric field, there would be no actual charge transference at all. Hence the plates on the capacitor would remain overall neutral. So I certainly see no free energy available here.

Just out of curiousity Lamare, are you by any chance Irish?

[lamare]

Just out of curiousity Lamare, are you by any chance Irish?

No, I'm Dutch:
http://www.tuks.nl/

But I live in the eastern part of The Netherlands, near the German border. People living there, "tukkers", are also often said to tend to have a mind of their own.

[sebosfato]

Faraday when you separate the ions you have close to one electrode h+ and close to the other electrode oh-. What is this?

A battery. There is a potential difference. So what happens if you short the circuit out? The 2 OH- ions loses 2 electrons forming O2 and H2O, this electrons travel across the coper bar and the rectifier switch and get on the other side where 2 H+ ions discharge than forming H2. Actually in some books they affirm that H+ ions does not exist that they are H3O+ normally. However i believe that this is the part of the magnetic field. Because on tomlins book they stated that experiments with mass spectrometer leaded to results of H+ ions or ions weighting 1g and 17 grams ions witch we have to assume to be H+ and OH-. So magnetism is needed...

Im kind of thinking that meyer found someway very clever to create the magnetism in his tube.

I believe that inside the inside tube, he placed a rolled capacitor maybe as big as the tube itself and connected to the tube extremities. than he got the ground connected to the bottom of the tube and the top of the tube connected to the primary of the transformer (in series) and than the other lead of the primary he connected to the transistor and positive side... Or inversely...

However than the secondary he connected one side to a diode witch than was connected to the outer tube. and the other lead of the secondary he might have connected on the side of the primary where the transistor is connected...

Why all this...

While driving the primary at a certain frequency he will resonate the inside tube at a huge amperage and some what high voltage and high frequency. This current will generate a giant magnetic field, and at the same time as electrons like to stay on the other side (faraday cage) and at high frequency they will flow outside of the metal. They will be flowing thru the water...

I'm than believe that meyer forced the water in the tube to get the job done...

Sit down take a paper and try figure what i just explained... Think about...

[Farrah Day]

Wikipedia-self ionization of water.

In water the amount of ions is extremely small,. Far
less than 1%. In meyers cell I don't think the ions play
as big a role as others have mentioned.

Given that this 1% allows normal electrolysis to readily take place, it would seem more than enough would it not?

However, if you devised a way to induce water to ionise more readily than it would do naturally, by influencing it with external alternating electric fields instead of dragging a heavy current through it, that would seem like progress.

Trust me HMS, this topic is never done!

[Farrah Day]

HMS, have you given up with your Naudin replication then?

[wojwrobel]

hello

you guys may find this intresting...

espacenet — Bibliographic data

and this

espacenet — Bibliographic data

theres more that use the same idea...

cheers from poland
wojsciech

[Farrah Day]

HMS

Forget what modern or conventional science says can or cannot be done and follow your own line of experimentation to prove or disprove your own theories on things.

I'm not at all against new science, and it's not the fact that Meyer may have been doing something unconventional that irritates me. No, I'm all for that. My problem is that, irrespective of whether or not conventional science can explain it, the facts seem to be that no one can replicate it.

What I'm saying is that, if it works it works, and no doubt science would then find a way to explain how it works. But to-date my conventional way of thinking seems to have been fully substantiated by so many failed replications and unsuccessful builds.

There are only a handful of people who claim to have run a car on water and I know of not one person or organisation that has successfully replicated any one of the designs, even though patents and design details are readily available.

Some people will try to defend such as Meyer by saying that he left crucial information out of his patents to protect his inventions. But anyone in the know will tell you that this would be just about the most foolish thing you could do as it would leave the door open for any enterprising company to fit the missing pieces of the puzzle and then patent their own modified version, quite simply stating that Meyer's patent would not work, but theirs certainly would.

Don't let conventional science get in the way or hold you back, but at the same time don't ignore it altogether - it has its uses!

[lamare]

Lamare, I don't believe that a polarised dielectric alone could charge a capacitor. The only way this could happen, as in the MIT experiment, is if there are active charges on the surface of the dielectric. Otherwise, even though the electrons in the plates of a capacitor would move with respect to the dielectric field, there would be no actual charge transference at all. Hence the plates on the capacitor would remain overall neutral. So I certainly see no free energy available here.

There is no such thing as a perfect insulator. If there is a field, some current will leak trough any dielectric. That's why capacitors will not hold their charge forever. So, it is possible and actually a known fact. It's just that it won't give you enough useable power.

As has been shown on this forum, you can push normal electrolytic capacitors that far that they will recharge themselves multiple times for a considerable period of time. This recharging takes a while, so I don't see any practical use for it, especially not now I understand how Meyer did it and why this is so difficult to replicate. Eventually is the same principle Gray used as well as Pucharin, but I already explained that.

[sebosfato]

Sorry lamar,
I never saw a capacitor self recharging. The only explanation for this can be that it is receiving a radio signal witch is than rectify automatically for being electrolytic as you said.. but is useless for sure.

[sebosfato]

The physics behind meyer invention is basic and stupid.

3 things can lead you to understand

1° keep it simple stupid

2° voltage perform work

3° Short circuit

[SeaMonkey]

Then take a look at figure 1 in Puharich's stuff, the signal generator block diagram (page 3):
http://www.free-energy-info.com/PatE7.pdf
Andrija Puharich: Water Decomposition by AC Elecrolysis >

There you see that L1 and L2 are driven from an open transformer and therefore no current flows in and out of the outer terminals of the whole train, which starts at the open end of the "insulating" TF and ends at the "resonance sensing" resistor.

The diagram which shows the 'open' in the
secondary circuit of the transformer is an
error.

The 'dangling end' of the upper secondary
winding should connect to common or GND.

These kinds of errors frequently make it
into patent documentation and are seldom
corrected.

[sebosfato]

Guys try this

connect a tube cell to an oscilloscope, NOW!!! and than connect a 12v battery for one second and than disconnect the battery.

What do you see??? Reversed polarity???

Why???

The ions!!!