URGENT! WATER AS FUEL DISCOVERY FOR EVERYONE TO SHARE

[livingwaters08]

Group,
I don't want to muddy the waters here, but this may help when connecting all of this to an engine.  Years ago automobiles were positive ground.  My late grandfather's 1932 Ford is an example of this.

Could this arrangement help the grounding problem of the inverter in the circuit ?  I just felt compelled  to mention this.  I don't know how complicated it would be to convert a modern automobile over to positive ground, or even if this would be feasible.

Hope this information helps in some small way.

Livingwaters08

[tinu]

...
What is not up for debate even by the most skeptical is that it is possible for a device to output energy while putting either no or less energy into it in any deliberate form.

So is this more energy out that in?
...

Well, I strongly challenge that!
(Nothing personal here; the issue is for group ? it just happened I found your post)

Shortly: much excitement on the paper already published (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=get93) at a first reading. Many thanks to Ben and Stefan for pointing to it and for making it available. I said WOW and put it away for careful study. Several ours later, a big BUT appeared: on page 125, in Table 1, E12 is grossly miscomputed, by a factor of 100. A mass Mg of about 60g which is propelled at a height of 0.5m needs only 0.3J and NOT 30J. All E12 are miscomputed as so are Eout/Ein ratios. E12 is the heart of the whole paper (as well as of other papers published earlier); it makes me wonder what happens here, as such a mistake is not to be made by a scientist?

In conclusion: Graneau and Graneau clearly prove that about 1% or less of initial energy (that is 0.3J out of 30J or so) goes into studied phenomena and produces a loud bang. If they are correct, there is no useful energy in that bang and no motor is possible, no matter how spectacular the effect is. Not to mention that overunity and extra-energy would be out of question and the whole paper goes down the drain and a large part of the reputation of the parties involved?

Regardless of the above, I was about to raise the issue of real power out. But as an ?armchair scientist? that never seen an electron nor had changed its filters and quarks in a while now, I better refrain myself?

Any thoughts?
Cheers,
Tinu

[gotoluc]

@All
I just could not walk away without trying something else. I was interested in the usage of the series Xenon and wondered what a Xenon plasma would do and not use the pulse flashing.

Now I admit I have changed things a little, but if you want a shock wave here is how to get it. In a cylinder with a movable piston, fill the cylinder 1/2 full of water with the piston just under the surface, call it a down stroke position. With two SS wires I electrolyze some of the water, the gas stays in the water with much going against the piston. Fire your spark and all hell breaks free. Not only does the gas explode but it appears to cause a secondary reaction that splits off additional that is consumed.

Granted this does not sound good for running a conventional engine, but hey, new engine a water engine. You do not even need oil in the crankcase as water is a fine lube. Now for the best part, the plasma and or the flash can be used to preheat the water and it reacts faster and with more force.

So gentleman maybe its time to go to the lathe and milling machine, this could work, assuming you have a water supply. Oh and I was doing this on 20V@50ma, not bad.

The jury of course is still out on if this is in any way connected to some other form of trigger energy, heck if we can split water and get it to chain react in some way, why not.

Hi Dr. Stiffler, that sounds amazing. Looking forward to a video

At everyone, today is Canada day and I worked all day on the circuit and found something new. The flash of the spark is so bright that I cannot look at it anymore. You cannot see this too much in the video but look at the wood board the spark plug is on, it turns blue. Also look at the last frames and you will see the flame come out of the plug over one inch.

Please look at the new video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPVs_UJ-XRU

S1R has told me that when I have the kind of spark he has I would need sun glasses to look at it. I need to do more tests before I can say if this is the real thing.

Please stay tuned for updates.

Luc

[greendoor]

There are so many well documented stories of invertors running cars on water alone.  Who cares why it works - let's stick to experimental findings, instead of armchair bollocks.

The established sciences are bought and paid for with big oil money.  The facts are changed to suit the higher agenda - and no "scientist" really has any say in the matter.

Thought for your consideration: To protect yourself & your inverter - why not use an isolation transformer.  You can buy transformers that convert 110 to 220 or vice versa.  These could provide a nice boost as well as isolation. 

I have a big question mark at this time: is square wave really necessary?  Ignore my ignorant rantings earlier - i've read too much Beardon and not done enought experimenting.  If what Ossie is saying is correct - it should not matter 1% how we charge the capicitor ... DC is DC - is that correct?  Or does it have to be pulsed?

[aether22]

Well, I strongly challenge that!

You strongly challenge what? My question?

BTW as to there being more out than in I challenge your argument, first s1r9a9m9 showed it can power a car and so if as it seems this is successful creation of the effect then it seemingly should be assuming the origonal claim or myers claim are genuine.
But also please note the hole made in the half inch thick Aluminium, that shows there is tremendous power.

It is also worth noting that an experimenter reported to Keelynet that he had a transducer putting sound into water and at somewhere in range of the frequency several water OU inventors have used the water shot up leaving a hole in the ceiling.