Meyer's WFC concept analysed

[Esotericman]

I understand you (Farrah Day) are somewhat an electronics expert, but I wonder if there are any material, or molecular scientists out there.  I have a little education in both, so I'll add my two cents:
First of all I agree that, as stated and described, Meyer's setup just doesn't make sense.  Lots in his patent app don't make sense, yet you've latched onto one phrase in particular as basis for most of this- his reference to de-ionized water.  This seems to be what led you to this inspection of capacitance.  Well, I'm pretty sure that line was wrong.  I bet he went looking for numbers and found the values for PURE water, and assumed that (as opposed to saltwater), it was the same as TAP water, and used that in his equations which, ultimately, prove nothing anyway.  So I'm saying abandon the concept of the capacitor.  The object is not to store a charge.

There are a few red flags in particular I want to point out.  One is his devotion to Stainless Steel.  He says that stainless is used for its non-reactivity, but if that is the case, any non-reactive conductor would work equally well.  Like for instance, plastic coated copper.  A thin layer of plastic would prevent oxidation, with minimal electrical insulation.  He also indicates that Stainless allows the bubbles to form without sticking to the metal, like in conventional electrolysis cells.  Wrong!  The bubbles do stick, until you get all that brown crud to the top.  Ever wonder what that is?  Looks like rust to me.  Remember Stainless is Carbon, Chromium, and IRON.

Initially the cell wants to act just like a conventional cell, gas bubbles forming on the surface of the electrodes.  This layer of air CAUSES the system to behave like a capacitor by reducing current throughput, reducing the efficiency- because electrolysis requires electron flow (current)!  This conditioning process induces an oxidation reaction in the steel, forming a layer that the bubbles don't stick to, which is why the system works better once this is done.  So the magic is in the ability to keep bubbles off the electrodes.  Someone should do a chemical analysis on the "crud" but I'm guessing that's at least all the Iron on the electrode surface and that the actual material in contact with the water is probably just Chromium and Carbon.  And since bubbles stick to the pure carbon (graphite) in conventional cells, I bet the chromium is the key.  In any rate, the bubbles stay off.

This is why his layout works better than most under straight dc.  But the fact that pulsed works better still owes something to the concept of resonance.  And obviously his description doesn't really help there.  He implies that the molecules themselves move back and forth.  That's just vibration.  Ultrasound does that, and it's how that tiny disc at the bottom of the humidifier makes water vapor.  No, this is something else.  This is vibration at the atomic level.  It's not the molecules that move, but the atoms that form it.

The normal bond angle of hydrogen atoms in a water molecule is 104.45?.  At some critical angle, they will break loose.  The charge causes the molecule to flex, forcing the hydrogen atoms away from their 104.45? bond angle.  When the charge stops, the molecule relaxes.  But the bonds are elastic so it's more like a spring, bouncing back and forth at some given frequency.  By pulsing the charge, and stepping up the intensity (as per Meyer's waveform description), at some resonance of that frequency, you increase the amplitude of vibration.  Each pulse pushes the atoms further, until finally the critical bond angle is reached and the molecule breaks up.

Normal electrolysis works against the springback of the molecule, and therefore takes more energy.  It's kind of like tetherball.  The purpose is to wind the rope around the pole.  The un-coordinated can accomplish this by simply running around the pole while carrying the ball, or you can just stand still and slap it as it passes- which is more efficient?

*Sorry for the Length*

[Farrah Day]

Hi Eso

No, I'm no electronics expert, but I would appear to have more of a grasp on the subject than many who post.

Lost me pretty quickly with, 'his reference to de-ionised water'. Who's reference?  Meyer as far as I can tell never mentions de-ionised water, that was me.  However, I was just trying to bring home the blatent illogic and contradictions in what Meyer writes and says as I slog through the nonsense. But I see where your coming from in that if Meyer saw any old water as having a dielectric constant of around 78 then he would automatically assume that his cell is a capacitor.  Meyer's reasoning, his theories and indeed his formula's are flawed throughout, that's why I thought a full evaluation was called for.

I don't think Meyer was using de-ionised or pure water, but just everyday tap water - he states this on numerous occasions. I don't think that the water is the dielectric, but that the oxide layer on the anode is the dielectric and the water is actually the cathode. We have a wet electrolytic capacitor.

Red flags then. Well plastic coated copper might work well, but the plastic coating would be many times thicker than the microns layer of oxide created from conditioning and hence would create a much less efficient, much less effective and lower value capacitor. In atomic terms the difference in thickness between the oxide layer and a plastic coating would be immense. Why not simply allow the copper to oxidise and forget the plastic?  Maybe copper will work in a wfc, I have no experience in this.

Someone once wrote that you don't get the brown crud if you use de-ionised water. Well, I can't comment on that, but the SS aside, there must be lots of crud-forming impurities in tap water. 

As far as polarisation of the anode is concerned, well maybe the oxide helps prevent bubbles of hydrogen sticking, or maybe the pulsing plays apart here.  There are a lot of unknowns, but I do feel that all the pieces of the puzzle are all out there, it's just a matter of putting them together correctly.

Not convinced that we are resonating the atoms - this surely falls in the microwave range range. An ultrasonic mister or humidifier is only moving water from a liquid to gaseous form, not splitting the water molecule.

Yes, I think Purarich may have had something when he suggests that pulsing adds energy to the water molecule shifting its O-H bonding angle. He thinks that this makes the bond angle more stable, and hence less able to flex. This in turn enables us to use less power to break the bond.  It's all good stuff worth bearing in mind.

Just been looking at Bifilar windings - very interesting.  Add to this to the results that Dave Lawton has had with a bifilar coil in his Meyer wfc experiments and results look very promising.

Farrah Day

[mrgalleria]

Aloha,
Farrah Day, please see my post at "Stanley Meyer Replication with low input power".
Esoteric man- it looks like you read alot. Good stainless will leave little or no scum. I suggest, instead of trying to find how many reasons there are that it won't work, try to find the reasons it will.
Bill

[mrgalleria]

Aloha,
by the way, I got a big piece of good stainless free at the dump. It was an old restaurant hood. Check with anyone who remodels commercial kitchens, or sells used restaurant equipment, marine supplies, harbor boat builders, steel suppliers, etc. for your stainless. High nickel will provide little or no iron scum.
Bill

[Esotericman]

You misunderstand my motives.  I'm not trying to be counter-productive, just pragmatic.
Science and empiricism needs to have a place here if the scientific community, or the world for that matter, is ever to accept the notion of "free" energy.

Case in point:  "Good stainless will leave little or no scum"  What is your definition of "good"?  Shiny?  Hard?  Is an Austenitic stainless "better" than Ferritic or Martensitic?  Does it matter if it's hot or cold rolled?  What sort of heat treat is best?

See what I mean?  "Good" just doesn't cut it- We need to know what makes it good, so we can determine what's Best!  And I think the only way to do that is by figuring out what's really going on!

farrah My point about the water was in reference to the last paragraph in your initial post.  The dielectric constant quoted was not for clean or tap water, but stoichiometrically pure H2O, which is clearly not what he was using.  So basically, just what you said. 
I don't think the water is the source of the scum though- From what I've seen, the system can be used continuously by adding water and does not seem to produce an endless supply of scum.  In Meyer's original video he fills a pitcher, pours it in and throws the switch- no scum.  Plus considering Bill's post, I'm fairly certain it's only to do with the conductor material.

And yes, ultrasonic sound vaporizes water- we agree on that fact.  Simply vibrating a liquid doesn't split any atomic bonds, it just forces a phase change.  My point is, Meyer's description of molecules moving back and forth between the anode and cathode is the very definition of vibration!  So again, while I'm convinced the technology is genuine, his description just isn't quite right.  So I'm trying, like you, to correctly describe the process.

As for capacitors, I don't think a liquid capacitor can induce this molecular dissociation.  Traditional electrolysis is fairly well understood and I'm convinced Meyer's is at least fundamentally similar:
Adding an electron to the water molecule replaces one hydrogen atom (proton).  Now if you strip an electron from the leftover OH-, the Hydrogen atom falls off and joins with a liberated proton to form stable H2 gas while the Oxygen bonds with another O for O2 gas.  There is therefore a necessary flow of electrons in order to split the molecule according to known scientific laws.

But since traditional electrolysis requires the movement of molecules to facilitate electron transfer, the question is, how do electrons travel from the anode to the cathode without being carried by the molecules?  Somehow Meyer's machine accomplished this- how?

See, ultimately the technology should be reducible to single molecules- solid state.  We should be able to break a single water molecule, recombine it, and absorb that energy.  Or at the very least, create a small-scale closed system that drives itself.

So I do want to figure out how to make this work, Bill.  I just want to be able to carry it in my pocket!