How can you make a Magnetic Gas?

[madhatter]

That's a nice and easy setup!

Great info Duncan.

He talks about using around 32V
Anyone know how many amps it takes aprox?

I like to make a small scale version to play with.

I designed something similar a few years back, but never built it. It's on the forum here somewhere, here is a pic:

Here is my little "Sparp plug" version :

Water under slight pressure comes in Glas tube trough one way valve
As the water level touches both the electrodes, the gas vorming starts.
An Underwater spark is formed between the two carbon balls
Gas forms and is pressed out of the tiny opening at the plug head
As all the water has turned to gas, the the Tungsten Spark head will become the lowest resistance and sparks the gas.
This way only one continues voltage needs to be applied. ( In my theory/fantasy at least ;-)



Around it I have an energizer only connected to one terminal, The pos or the neg, may change i will see, but the energizer coil will only be connected to one terminal.

I never made it, but it starts to itch again..

C'man

it's a simple concept and in theory would be fairly easy to do, however as with all things the devil is in the details. I'll share some findings from my research into pretty much the same thing.

I was doing some of the calcs I came to conclude that gas flow electrification would be a problem.. surface charge on the droplet formation would in effect stop the process.

start with a high pressure gas, passing thru an orifice into secondary low pressure volume that contains a charged plate. as the gas passes thru, there will be an electrostatic charge picked up on the surface. electrical conductivity will determine the ability to be charged or neutral, and that upon atomization combined with the joule Thompson effect, the condensate droplets will carry a charge hetro/uni-polar on the surface. now if the gas does not form droplets and there is no surface area the charge may be determined or calculated simply from the molecule and it's bond, if there is a no droplet formed then the electrostatic effect would be greater in low density gas. the point of all this was a thought of using electrostatic charge combined with the thermal energy of excited gas to increase the efficiency of electrolysis.

an arc discharge thru water would difficult to contain, simplify the process and start with say the gas in a pressurized container and work out the end result desired, then work backwards toward starting from in this case for example the water.

electrolysis of water is step one, lots of ways to achieve that. step two is where one utilizes the gas in an accelerator, i.e. electron cascade, multipactor effect. oxygen is magnetic hydrogen is not, ionized hydrogen is a proton, a proton in a particle accelerator can be a dangerous p-beam. yes the voltages needed would put you on a 'list' stupid fast.

this is all based on linear process and thinking of external source voltage, that doesn't need to be the case, it's possible in theory to take the components and assy it into a self-powered system.

I suggest everyone who's interested in such stuff really do the homework on Farnsworth and electrostatic optics. read and re-read thru farnsworths mutlipactor patent, it's full of gems. I'm currently working on developing quaternions to work with electrons and magnetics. Eric mentioned that the Farnsworths son said his father said the key to unlocking the mystery was in hyperbolic functions and the electron as it relates to counter-space. It's taken me over a year to figure out how to even proceed with that.

counter-space algebra is odd enough, add in hyperbolic geometry and polar and Cartesian coordinates suffer in that vectors and versors with fields get all jumbled. quaternions avoid this 'gimbal lock', however the trick is in units and terms.

it's slow going for sure and frustrating as I'd rather be building and experimenting but without and idea of how to proceed it'd be a fools errand. I've dug up many who've tried and are still working on marrying quaternions to physics but there is in my mind a problem when they start with constants that were assumed or derived using false premise, the fault carries forward. starting from scratch is a massive undertaking.

[Cherryman]

Hi MadHatter,

Tnx for your repley.
Most of the things you talk about go a little over my head, although I (believe) understand the direction you wanna express.

I did back then some experiments, so it is not totally new for me. But I'm just a hands on guy who likes to play (with fire) ;-)

I did some experiments with HHO producing and detonation in the same chamber, a little like the plug above, but a larger version.

Here is one of the vids, more on my channel. So I guess i did some "reverse" engineering already. On this one I just shoot away a plastic cap.
I even filled a balloon with explosions, using valves to direct the explosion and implosion different ways. ;-)

HHO 12 - YouTube

World first HHO explosion filled balloon - YouTube

Just some fun ;-)

Anyway, project is on hold at the moment, as i'm busy making a simple! Stirling engine design witch i think will be way more efficient than the usual ones, also got some Nitinol in the mail order... So too little time, too many interesting stuff.

Good luck with your project, and please share if you can vids or pics.. always interesting!