None Electrolytic Splitting Of H2o

[FRC]

powerme,

Please elaborate on your idea. Like where to find some of the items your using and some more info on how to utilize it in a system. Interesting idea and experiment to me.

I dont know where Mike is he hasn't been on in a while. I would like to know if he has had anymore success with his projects.

Anyway thanks powerme for anything you can share,
Chris

Just check out the Discussion. Best way to use heat from HHO to generate electricity thread, powerme gives all the details there.

FRC

[Michael John Nunnerley]

powerme,

Please elaborate on your idea. Like where to find some of the items your using and some more info on how to utilize it in a system. Interesting idea and experiment to me.

I dont know where Mike is he hasn't been on in a while. I would like to know if he has had anymore success with his projects.

Anyway thanks powerme for anything you can share,
Chris

I am still around, not kicked the bucket yet! THE ELECTRONIC BOARDS ARE IN THEIR FINAL STAGE OF PRODUCTION.

When all has been tested to be ok, more will be posted here and I hope with a demonstration.

Mike

[superman9976]

I am still around, not kicked the bucket yet! THE ELECTRONIC BOARDS ARE IN THEIR FINAL STAGE OF PRODUCTION.

When all has been tested to be ok, more will be posted here and I hope with a demonstration.

Mike

I'm glad your still around I was getting worried! I have been reading and studying about ammonia. It seems to contain more hydrogen in liquid form than hydrogen itself in liquid form difference being hydrogen is way colder to become liquid and ammonia stays liquid under pressures of 125 to 150 psi. I found some good books like complete wireless design and rf component and design. I still am very determined to understand and know how to build it. I await your demonstration that would be wonderful! Most importantly when your ready for me to buy one from you. We have many ideas for the reaction chamber although its not much good without the boards.
Thanks for your quick reply Mike!

Chris

[superman9976]

Just check out the Discussion. Best way to use heat from HHO to generate electricity thread, powerme gives all the details there.

FRC

Thanks FRC for your reply! Interesting idea.

Chris

[Michael John Nunnerley]

Hi All

For those that are interested, there are other gases that can be made using this system of which one is methane "natural gas" which can be made from CO2 and H2O to give CH4 and O2. This is easier than making ammonia and details will be forthcoming in the future.

Mike

[Harvey]

Hi All

For those that are interested, there are other gases that can be made using this system of which one is methane "natural gas" which can be made from CO2 and H2O to give CH4 and O2. This is easier than making ammonia and details will be forthcoming in the future.

Mike

Hi Mike,

Enjoyed our chat the other day. Your email did not make the trip though, could you send it again?

Thanx

[superman9976]

Hi All

For those that are interested, there are other gases that can be made using this system of which one is methane "natural gas" which can be made from CO2 and H2O to give CH4 and O2. This is easier than making ammonia and details will be forthcoming in the future.

Mike

Wow! A question immediately came to mind was what is your CO2 source?
Is it ambient air or are you using a tank of CO2?
-Chris

[Michael John Nunnerley]

Wow! A question immediately came to mind was what is your CO2 source?
Is it ambient air or are you using a tank of CO2?
-Chris

you only have to think about where are there problems of CO2 in the world and you have your answer, of course a good source for both CO2 and water is sea water, which even has the catylist included "salt".

I have documented various different molecular manipulation systems which all are based on frequency irradiation and vibration of the molecules of different molecular structures, such as water, and recombining with the aid of a catalyst to form new molecular compounds.

Mike

[Harvey]

An Ocean Trap for Carbon Dioxide - Technology Review

Scientists Pursue CO2 Storage In The Ocean Floor : NPR

Ice that burns could be a green fossil fuel - environment - 26 March 2009 - New Scientist

Clathrate hydrate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

ScienceDirect - Energy Conversion and Management : CO2 clathrate formation and its properties in a simulated deep ocean

[Ordo_Ab_Chao]

Hello Michael

I am glad to see that there are individuals not limited by immediate sight...and, instead possess foresight and an all encompassing understanding of the physical transformations needed to run an inverted electrolysis setup.

Please tell me what you think of this...(keep in mind this is in reference to the "demo" cell...not the injectors or anything, although the principle is the same)

My ultimate theory......


Regular electrolysis supplies electrons along with the voltage potential (grounded transformer, if any transformer at all). Since you are supplying the electrons, you add electrolyte to make it conduct large amounts of current for high yield. But, whenever electrons flow they collide making heat which impinges on their flow...creating losses.

Stan's setup supplies no extra electrons...he uses an ungrounded transformer....complete electrical isolation.
Think about it...how would we supply electrons into the water if the input circuit only pulses the primary?
Answer....we don't/can't

Any and all electrons that flow have to come from the secondary side of the setup...secondary, chokes and WFC

I know it may seem like a very simple concept...but, the truth is in the detail.

Knowing this simple fact, let us re-examine

Since the primary will definitely create an induced voltage potential across the secondary, why are people who created rather nice replicas not seeing much gas production?

Well, it's because of that deceptively simple fact...no electrons are added. Because any electron flow through the secondary side of things is an externally driven (magnetic not electronic) closed loop...meaning, as an electron leaves the WFC one is coming back in....NO NET CHANGE!! (serpent eating its own tail)

You may say..."well it's the same in regular electrolysis"...and it is (in regards to how electrons flow)...however, the difference is the fact that along with your voltage potential, you are supplying electrons above and beyond equilibrium...this fuels chemical reactions, raises temp, and costs a lot since you are directly killing your dipole.

So, what's my point?

Ever wonder why the EEC in one of Stan's patents is just a bulb in series with the WFC? Ever wonder why every individual cell has it's own special resistor on the negative?

These electrons need something to do...by temporarily going into the EEC they are temporarily not in the water...when this happens, you have time for the water to separate and move. Orthagonal magnetic fields help move these momentary ions out of the zone of dissasociation/re-association.

So, just putting this out there, feedback welcome

[ewizard]

Part of what powerme is talking about : "A team of researchers from the University of Wisconsin-Madison have just discovered that crystals of zinc oxide, if submerged, absorb its vibrations and act like a piezoelectric material, developing areas of strong negative and positive charges.
You can imagine what happens next: these charges dissociate the surrounding water molecules into hydrogen and oxygen."

Article here as originally posted by Altrez: click here

This helps eliminate the need for high current to get sufficient hydrogen production. I believe there are some other benefits to this concept also.

[Armagdn03]

I am still around, not kicked the bucket yet! THE ELECTRONIC BOARDS ARE IN THEIR FINAL STAGE OF PRODUCTION.

When all has been tested to be ok, more will be posted here and I hope with a demonstration.

Mike

Mike! good to see you around, I am still around also and would really like to follow your instruction with your board when you are set to show. Take care, and go at your pace.

[Aaron]

water fuel

Well, it's because of that deceptively simple fact...no electrons are added. Because any electron flow through the secondary side of things is an externally driven (magnetic not electronic) closed loop...meaning, as an electron leaves the WFC one is coming back in....NO NET CHANGE!! (serpent eating its own tail)

You may say..."well it's the same in regular electrolysis"...and it is (in regards to how electrons flow)...however, the difference is the fact that along with your voltage potential, you are supplying electrons above and beyond equilibrium...this fuels chemical reactions, raises temp, and costs a lot since you are directly killing your dipole.

IF and that is IF there is a fast and strong enough impulse that causes a
sharp enough gradient in vacuum space, it can bring in more potential
into the circuit that wasn't there in the so-called "close loop". So a loop
like this doesn't automatically mean that something can't be added to
the circuit under different conditions from the outside.

EVERY point within the circuit
that has a potential difference between any two respective points IS
a dipole - not just the intended power supply dipole. Potential can come
into the circuit at any point of potential difference in the circuit and in a
simple circuit, there can be hundreds and hundreds of dipoles but the most
significant will be inductors and capacitors besides a battery dipole. And
again, it has to be a very sharp gradient to allow potential to flow into
the circuit when the high voltage positive is reversed for example - it
leaves a negative pressure in its wake that will pull positive potential
in from the vacuum adding it to the circuit.

This offsets the previous ratio between the Heaviside flow and the
"electron current".

I'm not saying this to claim there are electrons added to the circuit,
I'm just saying it is possible with or without an ungrounded transformer.

And besides pre-existing electrons from the air for example, "electrons"
can also manifest directly out of the vacuum - not just the potential.

I think your right that the intent is for the circuit to not supply extra
electrons since there is a desired positive charge (for Stan) possibly
but there is no such
thing as complete electrical isolation for all practical purposes. If there
is a strong enough impulse (sharp gradient), it will pull potential right
out of vacuum time/space and can pull electrons directly from the
air - meaning it can find a ground through the air and definitely supply
x quantity of "electrons" to this ungrounded circuit, which it may or
may not be doing. Most likely there are electrons added in this way
at some small level but not enough to make much of a difference
because if the technique is right, the proper fuel is created and the
entire notion of all the electron stripping business is just a distraction.

Properly used magnetic fields can certainly increase the efficiency of
electrolysis both steady dc and pulsed.

But in respect to Stan's explanation in his patents, all of these ideas
based on what he says and shows is under the assumption that he
was actually doing any of this and not something else. I can't prove it
either way what Stan was specifically doing but the track record for
following what his patents, docs and videos state have resulted in
a 100% failure rate for anyone to run a car on water doing what he has
publicly claimed.

I hope I am wrong and that someone can produce a car that is running
on water based on information gained from his videos, docs and patents.
Any takers?

Anyway, this heterodyning circuit concept is completely different than
anything that Stan has described in his docs, videos or patents. It has
nothing to do with "electron stripping" with "EEC's", etc...

There is enough information in this thread that discusses the principles that
anyone with experience in making rf circuits can start testing. The circuit
would be straight forward to them and then it is just a matter of what
flavor of antenna setup do they choose to use with it.

I hope that someone is able to show a way to get similar results with just
the right mixing of high voltage and high frequency - would make it
easier but probably not as effective.

[Ordo_Ab_Chao]

Aaron, I agree with pretty much your whole response. I do understand that such a sharp/strong gradient could very well pull in ambient energy, (from the local environment, and directly from the aether/vacuum), but I guess what I am trying to say, is that "why would it?". Because you have the most direct connection to the coaxial wave guides, so, in my mind I see the medium (water) between these wave guides (Tube set) as the medium most easily manipulated by the sharp/intense gradient. This is compounded in my mind by the fact that water has a lower ionization constant than air. So any influx would almost certainly take place in the wave guide, especially due to the relatively small distance between the walls of the waveguide.

As for the heterodyning theory, I believe that is more along the lines of Puriarch. I also believe this is were people are coming up with the idea of impedance matching. It is my belief that if you are trying to replicate Meyer you would want to take advantage of impedance bridging not matching.

It comes down to timing, in that we need to prevent ion mobility.
Because even if the circuit is ungrounded, it is connected to the primary through magnetic circuit. If it starts conducting on the secondary side we will see more amps in to replace the magnetic energy that syncs into the secondary side.

[Aaron]

tube gap and water

in my mind I see the medium (water) between these wave guides (Tube set) as the medium most easily manipulated by the sharp/intense gradient.

The rest I think an engineer can answer, but your quote above,
Stan Meyer says on page 8 possibly in the beginning of the tech manual
he is using voltage potential for water splitting. So I agree it is a
sharp gradient - possibly but that also means that if he is using
voltage potential and all his comments and evolutions in his diagrams
show restrictions in electron current - his goal was to have no
current at all and simply electrostatic stress on the water between the
gap - according to what he did disclose.

But in regards to grounding, I think I recall that in his diagrams where
he shows the tubes enclosed in delrin encasements, there is a grounding
symbol showing the water is actually tied to ground. I'll have to double
check to make sure but I think it is there.