Bob Boyce 101 efficiency details

[jdcmusicman]

I have never seen one ounce of proof that the boyce cell with his magic toroid coil does what he says it does .....He does have a nice big cell , but I dont think it can do what he claims..

[Farrah Day]

Newbie wrote:

But what is with your  attitudes, why do you guys need to be so rude (and act like little 12 year olds) ? 

The point is Newbie that many of them are 12 year olds or thereabouts, or have a similar mental age. That's why most of them don't have a clue what they are talking about, don't understand what anyone else is talking about, and ultimately revert to the only thing they do know - foul language and stupidity!

And what are we supposed to make of that dark, shaky and blurred U-tube video?  We did not even have any insight into his set up - what makes him think that no current was flowing? But hey, he's illuminated fairly lights but used no power - won't Santa be chuffed!

Faraday's Laws of Electrolysis are great and if you understand them fully you will see that every electron plays it's part. That's just how it works.

This works great in a standard electrolyser with electrodes giving up and taking on electrons from ions, as every electron is travelling through the cct from the power souce, and the gas evolved is obviously (it has to be) directly proportional to this current.

From this it is clear to see that only if there is another source of electrons (electrons not coming from our power supply) can there be any over-Faraday results - or perceived to be.  I say perceived, because even then it would not be over-Faraday if you accounted for the current provided by the alternative source of electrons.

The big question is, are some circuits introducing an additional source of electrons that have not originated from our power source?

Even if, as I tend to think, Boyce's electrolyser was providing ultrasound cavitation to enhance ionisation, these ions would still need to exchange electrons to evolve as gas, so his electrolyser would still abide by Faraday's Laws.

On the other hand, the Kanzius discovery, is currently set apart from any process with submerged electrodes. And though, yes, there is a supply of energy to the electrolyte solution, there definately is no supply of electrons from the power source - which is what makes it so intriguing... but I'm repeating myself now.

Oh, just while I'm thinking about it, I once had heated (you can imagine) discussions with Boycie about leakage current. Boycie claimed that his electrolyser was more efficient when each cell was properly sealed as it prevented current leaking from around the edge of the electrodes. I could not understand why any ion current would take the long way around a plate, and not be attracted directly to it. It made no logical sense to me, and my not bowing to his greatness meant that we inevitably fell out!

Boycie was right about sealed cells being more efficient, but I don't believe it is for the reason he gave. I now have my own take on this.

That is: Any water molecule not dissociating into ions directly between the plates is very likely to recombine as a water molecule before it can exhange charges. And as ionisation is an endothermic reaction, so requiring energy, every time this happens energy is wasted - hence there is increased inefficiency.

[newbie123]

That is: Any water molecule not dissociating into ions directly between the plates is very likely to recombine as a water molecule before it can exhange charges. And as ionisation is an endothermic reaction, so requiring energy, every time this happens energy is wasted - hence there is increased inefficiency.

That is what I figured as well.    The the ions were recombining and releasing heat, instead of creating gas... I've even seen bright arcs around plates as well..

[newbie123]

I have never seen one ounce of proof that the boyce cell with his magic toroid coil does what he says it does .....He does have a nice big cell , but I dont think it can do what he claims..

Me neither, that's why it's feel it is perfectly  fair to just write him off as a crank.   All talk with absolutely nothing to show, but some plans that just don't work for anyone.

But even the claim that the 101 plate cell will produce over Faraday gas production, by itself .. Is just miss calculations.   I've heard many people claim their series cell will achieve over 100 percent Faraday...  200 percent,  and even 300 percent...     BS!

[Farrah Day]

Agreed Newbie

Caculating the gas output from a dc set up is quite straight forward, but once you start employing pulsing and various other waveforms, even the most sophisticated measuring equipment can provide inaccurate results.

People should also not confuse the gas output according to Faraday's Laws calculations with efficiency - they are two different things.  Every standard electrolyser will only give the gas output proportional to the current through the cell, what ever that current may be. That cell can be made more or less efficient, but Faraday's laws always apply.  People who can't see this have not read or do not understand Faraday's Laws of Electrolysis.

But I guess some folk will forever remain blind to the truth and always insist on seeing something that is not there!

It's like I mentioned somewhere else, Hartman has arouund $15000 up for grabs if someone can provide him with proof of OU. Yet none of these people claiming they have achieved OU seem interested in this sizeable pot of loot... why?

When it comes to proof, even patents are a complete waste of space, being proof of absolutely nothing - indeed most patents seem to be nothing more than concepts.  Therefore, though patents might at first appear to give a design or a device - or indeed the designer or inventor - credibility, this is in fact far from the truth.  It seems that anyone can patent anything irrelevant of whether or not the claims are met. If you search the patent databases, along with Meyer, you will find hundreds of electrolyser designs - the 'Hydrostar' people (I think Xogen) keep renewing their patent periodically, yet I know of no one to have replicated it - perhaps the gulible are still buying the construction manual.

In this field, like many others, you can not afford to take anyones word for anything.  On these forums you need to be able to trust the person making that claim... and that trust needs to be earned.