Resonance and HHO

[MasterPlaster]

@Gwandau, No not yet on this thread but as soon as something positive transpires and the thread becomes popular then you get the know it alls. It is because they read some misinformation somewhere and then states it as a fact elsewhere.


It is fine to put an idea forward as long as the contributer introduces his idea as a theory.
Imagine how many man years has been expended by people trying to replicate Meyer and no one seems to have been successful.
Even some of the giants claiming to have had success show themselves from time to time have never demonstrate anything solid.

This is not to put a negative spin on things. By now someone should have come close to a Puharich or a Meyer system but to my knowledge no one has.

[MasterPlaster]

@Paul

With respect to your question, This scene comes to mind: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbTyTyizz1s !

However, I don't this there is a static magnetic field large enough to cause a hazard to anyone.

The dangers of EM waves are well known but I have a theory that just as there are dangerous EM waves,
there are also beneficial ones. (something along Rifes ideas).

[MasterPlaster]

Very interesting. I never even considered the magnetic properties of the electrodes themselves as playing a significant part. 304 stainless it is then.


The consideration of the Lorentz force upon things? I need to do more research there. Again, interesting.

The stainless steel tubes that Meyer employed ( 304, but please check) is non magnetic.

[pauldude000]

The stainless steel tubes that Meyer employed ( 304, but please check) is non magnetic.

Keep this up and I will consider you my personal encyclopedia! You are proving yourself to be a wealth of good information.

[Gwandau]

@MasterPlaster,

thanks for clarifying, english is not my native language and this sometimes makes me miss nuances expressed within the context of the sentence.
I totally agree with you, this is a topic of such novel approach that every step taken has to be thoroughly evaluated.

Also,  however intriguing the tales of Stan Meyer and Puharich, I would personally actually prefer to start from scratch in order to avoid being mislead. Certain questions always come to me when I watch a video like that of Puharich. If he really had reached the point of fully being able to fission water at a COP= 1.2 as he claims, why doesn't he demonstrate his apparatus in action? I myself would have had a propane engine running right there on the table, HHO-fueled through the water splitter by a transparent water tank from which I repeatedly would drink a glass of water during my speech.

No, I am not convinced that he had reached all the way to this goal. Still I believe he possessed critical and unparallelled knowledge about the vulnerability dynamics of the water molecule bonds and possibly had achieved partial success to a degree convincing enough to motivate him going public.


@pauldude000, MastePlaster and all interested:

As a product developer in the surface coating industry since many years I am well aware of the magnitude of energy easily spent on wrong leads and have learned to regard the quality of rigorous method as absolutely essential when approaching uncharted areas.

Since we are approaching the water fission quest with the aim of using novel low energy keys instead of the old fashioned brute energy wasting force applied through ortodox electrolysis and the like, we have first of all to study and learn everything there is known today about the water molecule, from its three dimensional behaviour in its normal liquid state, to its appearance and behaviour in any of its extremes.

Did you know that water has several solid phases far above the freezing point when subjected to certain pressures?

quote: "Interestingly, at high pressures (~ 2.3 GPa), liquid water can be made to freeze at over 100 °C "   ( http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/ice_vii.html )

What I mean is, instead of running ahead in the initial inspiration and start doing experiments and most likely get lost in the massive magnitude of parameters sooner or later making us give up like the rest of the guys who have tried this before us, we should approach the structuration of implementation slowly like a cat moving towards its prey. I know it is extremely fun to start doing experiments, but I am afraid any premature actions just is a waste of energy making us into just another failure in the long row of failures evident before us.


Step one is to define the main parameters to be studied and explored.  What are the main parameters to take into consideration and study?

Below I have some suggestions, but they are far from complete, so I welcome anyone interested in helping to add anything you think is important.


Main Parameters:

1. The three dimensional dynamics of water molecule bonds.  (As far as I am concerned, this is absolutely essential to understand in depht.)

2. The applied set of frequencies and their geometry based upon the above dynamics,  and the possible use of carrier waves.

3. Design of the reaction chamber and frequncy transmitter.


Gwandau