All of Stanley Meyer's Equipment FOUND Including Dune Buggy! (Videos Here)

[MarkE]

@Everyone:
Stan Meyer's original patent was rejected by the United States Patent and Trademark Office.  USPTO examiners didn't believe he had anything other than standard Faraday electrolysis, so the original patent application was denied.  Stan then filed an appeal, which due to this appeal process, US Patent Office examiners were forced to allow Meyer to demonstrate his now famous "Demo Cell" at the patent office in Washington DC at a special hearing.  Meyer convinced all of the US Patent Office examiners in attendance (and their seconded experts) that his technology was in fact far more efficient than Faraday electrolysis thus awarding him his patent as a result of the findings of this appeals hearing.   

It is a commonly held misconception that a granted patent means that the subject invention does what its inventor claims.  This is not true.  Many, many patents have been granted for inventions that do not work.  The patent office is required by law to give wide berth to claims.  The rules for rejecting a patent because the examiner does not beleive the invention can work are very restrictive and weighted very heavily in favor of the applicant.

One of the requirements for getting a patent grant is that the examiner must be convinced that a person of ordinary skill in the art can practice the claims without "undue experimentation".  Given that in over 20 years no one has shown that they can reproduce Stanley Meyer's extraordinary claims one may reasonably conclude that the same person who an Ohio judge declared had committed an "egregious fraud" failed to enable his patent applications.  An unenabled application is readily defeated in court. So, did Stan Meyer sabotage his own patent applications?  Or is the far simpler explanation the correct one:  He did not have what he claimed.

[chessnyt]

@Everyone:
I think what you have here is basically broken down into three separate categories. 

The first would be those who come to these forums in order to seek attention because they are bored and have nothing better to do all day.  On this point I agree with Oscar.  They have no life or they wouldn't have all the time in the world to respond to every thread in which they have arguments in progress.  They are talkers and not doers.  They have no friends because they have no people skills.  They try to fill this void in their life by using forums, such as this one, as surrogates.  They don't build or attempt to replicate these devices being discussed because they are not here to contribute in an experimental capacity.  This is not their purpose.  They are here, driven by pride, to try and sound like the experts and that they know it all (which also is not a trait that attracts friendships).  They pretend they don't care if they are liked or not, but secretly they desperately crave acceptance.  They see every posting as an opportunity to impress people by their recital skills and ability to argue in an attempt to appear smart and learned.  They always chose the safe side of the argument so as not to look unlearned or dumb.  They NEVER actually contribute to a replication.  Instead, they end up discouraging replicators from experimenting in uncharted waters.  Yes, they will be the first to admit they are always right and know everything there is to know, including what you are thinking.

The second would be the actual builders, who contribute to the forum in a tangible way.  They seek to pool their experimental knowledge with others in similar areas of research.  They are the doers and not just talkers.  They put their own money on the line and keep trying, despite those who attempt to dissuade them and discourage their efforts.  They are the ones that have the best chances to replicate a technology outside of the sacred and hallowed "laws" of physics.  Those are the people I am hoping to attract and pool my knowledge together with.  Unfortunately I have to wade through and put up with people from the category one and category three, in order to reach my intended demographic.
           
Category three is comprised of people who are here to purposely mislead and hijack threads in order to bring any meaningful progress to a halt.  They are here to intentionally disrupt a forum and hope to mire it in infighting and discord.  They know that people cannot be productive while fighting so fighting is what they are bent on.  They will claim to be here for legitimate purposes.  They will always claim to be defenders of fraud and the "good guys" of the forum.  They always pose as the voice of truth and wisdom, but all the while they are simply playing a part in a scheme to derail as much progress as possible.  Some just get a kick out of it.  Others are actually professionally paid disinformation agents working covertly.

Now will the builders please step forward?



Regards,

Chess

[SeaMonkey]

One reason that so few have succeeded in duplicating
Meyer's work is that Meyer himself didn't fully understand
what was happening and couldn't positively isolate the
critical pulse characteristics.  State of the art devices
and technology have improved considerably since the
time Stan was developing the driver circuits.

His pulsing devices, for the most part, utilized Bipolar
Transistors which have certain drawbacks.  Today it is
possible to use MOSFETs with high speed drivers to
better generate the necessary pulses.

So what is the "secret?"  Very sharp pulses of an optimal
pulse width at an optimum frequency modulated at an
optimum rate into bursts of the optimum number of pulses
with an optimal rest period between bursts.

The amplitude of the pulses should also be adjustable in
order to determine the most efficient peak voltage.

Those who have adequate knowledge of electronic circuits
and devices should rather easily be able to devise a circuit
with suitable adjustments to accomplish that task.

Begin tests with a simple cell consisting of just two electrodes
and spend the needed time patiently searching for results.

Once the phenomenon is observed and carefully evaluated
it may be possible to devise control circuitry to automatically
'scan and lock.'  One of Meyer's circuits was designed to do
just that.

Do not rely on Meyer's circuits to produce the best results,
however.  Be creative and improve upon his designs since
they were sometimes unreliable and difficult to adjust.

Examine the materials that Les Banki has generously provided.

If you really want it, go get it.  As inexpensively as possible.
Simplicity is key.

Chessnyt,

Your analysis above is right on the mark!

[chessnyt]

Thank you, Sea Monkey.  I will try some additional experimentation with these tips in mind.  I also need to look at the Les Banki material as well.  Would you kindly refer me to the thread in which Les shares his insights?




Thanks in advance,


Chess

[SeaMonkey]

You are very much welcome.

Look Here.