Stan Meyer Energy is Stolen from The Sun

[alan]

FarrahDay:

I don't think voltage can effect an electrons orbit, it has to be a photon particle. Voltage is only potential energy, a photon is a particle of energy.

See how a capacitor works:
http://books.google.nl/books?id=KgNhk-HcI4oC&pg=PA215&lpg=PA215&dq
page 212 bottom left.

The polarization of the dielectric is done by voltage alone, because no electrons are exchanged in a good dielectric. The energy to create the charge on a cap is derived from the total work to bring equal charges together on the plates.

Corona discharge is also a voltage phenomenon.

Voltage as kinetic energy can affect the orbit:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluorescent_lamp#Principles_of_operation


Voltage is charge brought toghether, when charge is doing work, it breaks down, because electrons travels from negative to the positive charge pole. The amount it can do is equal to the energy it'd cost to create the dipole. [nothing new]

Not sure what you mean by this. The charges on the plate of a capacitor or a Van de Graf generator are static until discharged. Have no idea about your million dollar question.

Is it possible to let voltage potential or static charge do work without discharging, or, without current?

For example:
If a television [or v/d graaff] attracts dust [we all know this from experience], without the dust making contact to the tv, is the static charge on the tv being discharged? 
If so, what works against it? [charged particle through an electric field creates EM energy, this must be working against it]
What if there is no path for this charge to flow along, when worked aganst? Then it can't discharge while displacing the particle.

According to the Aharonov-Bohm, potentals do indeed have physiscal significance, according to CED it doesnt [,if i remember correctly, not sure].

Water has a dipole moment by itself.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/diph2o.html
What if you resonate this by an oscillating voltage potential, while not allowing the potential to discharge through the water? [function of the VIC chokes]

Perhaps these are more relevant questions

also interesting:
waterbridge
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhBn1ozht-E

I'll give thse 2 [bohr, schrodinger] a shot, doubt I'll grasp it 

[Farrah Day]

Alan

The polarization of the dielectric is done by voltage alone, because no electrons are exchanged in a good dielectric. The energy to create the charge on a cap is derived from the total work to bring equal charges together on the plates.

This is not so though is it, because the voltage itself is the result of a build up of charges on the plate of a capacitor. The capacitor might not pass electrons, but it is the electrons that provide the potential difference between the plates.

Agreed voltage alone without the passage of current can influence other charged particles or bipolar molecules, etc, without current flowing. But, unless insulated in some way, as soon as any charged particle reaches the source of the voltage, it will interact, exchange charges and effectively we will get current flow.

This is why Meyer's WFC has yet to be explained. I've no doubt that the electric field caused by high voltages on the plates will cause water to ionise, but that only gives us H+ and OH-. How does Meyer explain how we get from this point to the evolution of H2 and O2, without the H+ and OH- ions exchanging charges at the electrodes and hence current flowing?

No one has yet answered this simple, but fundamental question. Meyer never even touched on it, and yet it is this simple detail that Meyer's credibility relies on. This little detail is the one that plagues me and no doubt is the reason so many scientists are so sceptical of (or simply dismissed) Meyer's claims.

With ions being some 50,000 times the mass of electrons, there will be a significant build up of charge on the plates of the WFC before the relatively massive ions are induced into motion.  Furthermore, electrons have much less resistance to travel than the ions, and though we are only talking fractions of a second, the initial time lag between electrons reaching the electrodes and the ions doing the same would be, relatively speaking, quite enormous.

However, as interesting as this phenomena might be, I'm not sure it is of any real use to us in regards to hydrogen and oxygen production, because we still need to exchange charges somewhere to get from H+ and OH- to H2 and O2!

My current experiments involve insulated electrodes, pulsed at a high voltage to induce ionisation, but then using separate electrodes within the cell to allow charge exchanges - hence no extra current is drawn from the PSU.

I hope to be detailing these experiments soon on the "Dissociation of Water" thread, but I'm currently also experimenting with a TPU.

Of course, you could always send Quarky $250 and he will give you all the answers on a platter 

[HeairBear]

A little TPU gem... http://keelynet.com/energy/emery.htm

Sorry, off topic a bit. I'll make up for it later.

[newbie123]

I'd be interested to see some detailed experiments on how water is affected by certain types of electric fields (ie.  pulsed, alternating between electrodes) ..   Electric fields from what I can gather do the following:   Lower the  water's dielectric value,  strong enough electric fields can result in the "complete destruction" of water's  hydrogen-bonded network (which sounds interesting, but I'm not really sure what this means exactly)

Reference:
I. Danielewicz-Ferchmin and A. R. Ferchmin, Water at ions, biomolecules and charged surfaces, Phys. Chem. Liquids 42 (2004) 1-36.

Does anyone have access to this book?

[HeairBear]

http://www.staff.amu.edu.pl/~zfd/pdf/b106c03.pdf