Overunity electrolysis - 31 times more effective gas production than with DC

[MarkE]

Guys too much theorizing is happpening in this forum.

Please make experimets and share your findings with us(or dont).
There is realy no point od arguing who is right. And so far as I know is not posible to split water just by making post on the internet.

Isn't the incident where Jesus split water into Brown's Gas at much better than Faraday efficiency one of the lost stories of the New Age Testament?

[ltseung888]

Guys too much theorizing is happpening in this forum.

Please make experimets and share your findings with us(or dont).
There is realy no point od arguing who is right. And so far as I know is not posible to split water just by making post on the internet.

Thanks. 

My focus is now on the Paper.  I am reproducing figure 6 here.  The comparison is a clear winning case for Pulsed DC.  The paper already contained the construction of the equipment, the electrolyte concentration, the DC pulse circuit etc.

The same experiment can be reproduced by Government Supported teams.  Visits can be made to the Indian Universities.  The researchers can be contacted.  Scenario D says that theoretically, DC Pulsing may be possible to split the water molecules.  The experiment can be reproduced and improved.  If the results as shown in figure 6 of the paper is possible, cheap hydrogen production on demand will be possible.

[MarkE]

The Indian paper makes extraordinary claims that have not been reproduced by anyone.  It includes oscilloscope screen shots that indicate they did not connect their instrumentation correctly.  The paper lacks any data establishing that they had their instrumentation and experiment controls in order.  In all probability, they have made themselves victims of gross measurement error.

[ltseung888]

 Some points from the Indian Paper.

1.    12V DC power supply used.
2.    NaOH used
3.    Frequency in 100 MHz range

I believe the team who got funding used something similar.  I have much more faith in the Indian Scientists than some Forum members.  DC Pulsing may indeed break up the water molecules differently from classical electrolysis.  The Electron Clouds of the gas mixtures are likely to be different.
Publication date:
Volume 3, Issue 1, 2012 pp.129-136.  Email address of author available.

[MarkE]

Some points from the Indian Paper.

1.    12V DC power supply used.
2.    NaOH used
3.    Frequency in 100 MHz range

If you believe that then you obviously did not look closely at their oscilloscope plots.  The only thing they had that 100E6 was the sampling rate of their oscilloscope.  The actual repetition rate of their waveforms could not be determined because they failed to show even one complete cycle, but was less than 500kHz.  IE it was at least 200 times lower than what they stated, and you have blindly quoted.

I believe the team who got funding used something similar.  I have much more faith in the Indian Scientists than some Forum members.  DC Pulsing may indeed break up the water molecules differently from classical electrolysis.  The Electron Clouds of the gas mixtures are likely to be different.
Publication date:
Volume 3, Issue 1, 2012 pp.129-136.  Email address of author available.

Evidence Lawrence:  You can speculate and believe all that you want, but without evidence it is all just speculation. 

The Indians presented figures such as Figure 7 shown below that directly contradicted their manuscript.  They read the horizontal scale and sample rate from the oscilloscope and stated those as the pulse width and operating frequency respectively.  Those are gross errors.  Their Figure 7, is basically useless except for refuting statements made in the manuscript.  Even if their pulses had been 200ns wide, which they weren't, the maximum repetition frequency would have been under 5MHz, 20X less than their reported 100MHz.  Did no one including the authors proof read their paper?  With such gross errors one should take great pause when evaluating the likelihood that either their other reported measurements or their conclusions that rely on their measurements have any basis in reality.