Stanley Meyer replication with low input power

[saintpoida]

yeah ok so my inducotrs might be too small

and about the transformer is that the toroid with 200 24awg winds and 600 36awg winds?

or something else?

and if it is then should that be wired in before the blocking diode as it is in the patent?

[RunningBare]

@Runningbare

Umm i dunno i just figured i would see more than 2v across the cell?

I thought we were trying to build a big voltage across the cell?

Hi,

the d14.pdf differs in design from the meyer patent in that it doesn't have the stepup transformer. This will keep the voltage at the tubes quite a bit lower. Besides the very high voltages come in VERY sharp spikes and are impossible to measure with multimeters. You will need a very fast o'scope to make them visible.
Lastly, tocreate the spikes you need large inductors, fine wire with loads of turns.....

regards

Robert

And I'll guaruntee the only time the scope will see those high voltage spikes from the transformer is while NOT connected to the tubes, once connected the load of the tubes will suppress those high voltage spikes, off load you may get spikes as high as 20kv but the current will be extremely low, in the microamps region, water has a resistance of around 400kohm depending on any impurities, do the maths...

20000 divided by 4000000 equals 5ma
Power equals I2R = 0.05 x 0.05 = 0.0025
0.0025 x 400000 = 1000 watts!

The circuit is not going to deliver 1000 watts, not even for a microsecond.

Stan Meyers was pulsing at high frequency to bring the water upto catastrophic break down which does not take more than a few 10s of volts.

[dutchy1966]

The patent tells us that the voltage across the cell will reach 1000 Volts or more because of the step charging.

Anyway, I suggest to either go by the patent OR by the D14.pdf file.

Robert

[razasunny54]

Hi Guys,

    Im also replicating the Xogen/Stanley Meyer Hydroxy Cell. I was making the electrical circuit as described in Dave Lawton's circuit. I read somewhere that stanley meyers was using a frequency of about 10 MHz. Does any one know the exact frequency at which the cell would operate properly ?

Thanks
Raza

[modernsteam]

I read it through, and it doesn't really prove anything:

Conclusion



        Energy efficiency index of the low current electrolysis should be refined, but in any case it will be greater than 10, that?s why there is every reason to think that a way to production of inexpensive hydrogen from water and transition to hydrogen energetic is opened.

It's not terribly efficient, and its not near overunity. This is just a method of using less current to make hydrogen (less energy in general), which does make less heat, but also makes far less hydrogen:

generates small quantity of gases

What's your exact point of posting this?

This further proves my point that hydrogen is merely an energy *carrier* not a source! Its far more efficient to use batteries! The only reason to use hydrogen is because of its compressibility and use in combustion engines. But by the time you convert the electricity to hydrogen and back to kinetic motion, you've lost at least %50 of the original energy.


I still don't understand why there is so much research going into hydrogen technologies.

Well, Dyamios, "there is so much research going into hydrogen technologies" because at least some researchers are finding that more chemical energy in the form of hydrogen comes out of their systems than goes in to dissociate the hydrogen and oxygen from the water. Like it or not, these researchers, most of them "amateur" to be sure, have found that hydrogen, and probably all other substances, have at least one resonant frequency which allows astute pulsing to sharply "perturb" or "disturb" the local vacuum around or within the hydrogen molecule to "bust apart"  that molecule, so that the Co-efficient of Performance for that effort exceeds 1. The nature of the local energetic vacuum seems to allow that. If that is the case, as some of us think it is, then your point of hydrogen being a carrier of energy we believe is not only correct, but proves our point!! Many of us treat hydrogen in its carrier role as an intermediary or mediative step in accessing vacuum energy, which  the Boren experiment has shown clearly to be over-unity by 18 times (18 times more energy out than in). As a result, hydrogen is simply one means of several - others being directly accessing the vacuum via electromagnetics - to get real free energy. We therefore post these ideas, which you have apparently at least until now seem to regard as nonsense, but so many of us have come to see as valuable information, to encourage all of us to further research.

Hal Ade
Gatineau, Qu?bec.