Dissociation of the Water Molecule

[Farrah Day]

Hi Loner

By all means feel free to follow your nose on this... I fully intend to do the same.

I suspect there may well be a common ground to be found somewhare between the quantum and the classical, but for now, at least, I'll be staying with what I'm comfortable with.

Right or wrong, I’m not too comfortable with H2Opower’s take on things, so I’ll be staying clear of that thread. I wonder about the legitimacy of continually ionising the oxygen atom again and again, etc, and why this in itself is not a great power drain. But as I don’t feel qualified to make educated comments on his ideas, I’ll reserve my judgement and let H2Opower’s progress speak for itself.

Since my last posts, I too have been getting a little excited by the prospects of undertaking some experiments to try to validate my own ideas. So, like you I might be taking a little time-out to devise and set up a few bench tests.

Good luck... and may the force be with you !

[Farrah Day]

Hope to find time to put some things together over the weekend in order to do some preliminary testing...

... catch you later Sherlock!

PS. Incidentally, for anyone interested, it appears that Stiffler is actually still a moderator and still active on the forum.

[atv]

Anyone has more info on this catalyst?
developed by MIT chemist Daniel Nocera has mimicked the step in photosynthesis in which green plants split water.

keep up the good work
regards, atv

[Farrah Day]

As the 'Cooking with Hydroxy' thread seems to be the only active thread at present, and as I don't want to hijack that or push it anymore off subject, I've decided to bring this thread back up.

I've now designed a few experiments to test a few of my theories. Theories which I touched on earlier in this thread and which to many tend to fly in the face of the accepted model of how standard electrolysis works.

To my mind, if you do not understand or cannot comprehend what is happening at molecular level, if you do not understand basic chemical reactions, how can you even consider building any kind of advanced WFC? 

I see people building all sorts of fancy coils, playing with various pulsing circuits, talking about building... gas processors, when they have no idea what is actually happening at molecular level, or what electro-chemical processes might be occurring.

Unlike most around here, I'm not particularly interested in OU - I'm not sure it even exists and won't be wasting my time going on a wild goose chase.

Hartman has a big money prize for all you guys achieving OU - kinda strange why none of you have yet claimed it!

What I do feel needs more research and is open to a much greater understanding is the dissociation of the water molecule - it is far less understood than generally accepted. What particularly interests me is what is actually happening at molecular level, and how these reactions can be influenced.

Unlike Mr H2OPower who popped across to this forum recently saying he could explain the Meyer WFC, but expected everyone else to build a Meyer-type gas processor, and who supposedly had 'Proof of Concept' when is all he had was ideas, I prefer to deal with real science and start at the beginning.

What concerns me somewhat is just how quickly this thread drifted down the board once I stopped posting on it. It sort of worries me that so few people were prepared to comment. I can only assume it was because no one had a clue what I was talking about and hence an education issue, in which case inteligent productive discussion might become difficult.

To be honest I'm not sure it will even be worth my effort posting here as the forum is continually littered with utter nonsense and abusive posts from the obviously mentally challenged, with no moderator intervention (Oh, in saying that, he did threaten to ban me earlier in the year for expressing my opinion). It also occurs to me that discussion is only really active when the village idiots are on a day out.

But, we'll see what happens. 

[exxcomm0n]

Actually, this approach (understanding at a molecular level) to HHO makes the most sense IMHO.

Until we have a better understanding of why electrolysis happens, it seems futile to try building a better device to achieve it.

"State of the art" at the moment revolves around amperage and that more is better, but it just strikes me the same as using an electric hand drill to saw a board in 1/2.
It can be done, but is woefully inefficient, and when that fact is announced the answer seems to come back that the drill bit needs to be bigger.

The best descriptions (or theory) as to how/why electrolysis happens that I've seen and been able to BASICALLY understand are those from Andrija PUHARICH (whose research some seem to think Stan Meyers may have used as a spring board for his devices).

These (Puharich/Meyer) devices haven't seemed to have great luck with replication but have the approach that makes the most sense.

NOW I'll go back and read the entire thread to get a gist of your theories.