Crystal Power CeLL by John Hutchison

[Koen1]

to @Koen1   (if this double-posts I'm sorry the website or my internet is acting wierd)

it's probably the website, I get it as well every now and then. Closing the browser, then restarting it and surfing back to www.overunity.com helps most of the time,
or at least it does on my end. But it is particularly annoying if it happens while you're posting a reply.

in reply to your question on sodium silicate, one interesting simple mix is wollastonite (calcium silicate) and sodium silicate (liquid form).  mix a tablespoon of wollastonite into a thick paste, pop in the microwave for a minute - forms a very nice lightweight insulative material, it has expanded quite a bit, not sure if it qualifies as a geopolymer, but it would make a good hot pad

Hmm well ok, I'll have to try it sometime. Don't have any calcium silicate around at the moment but I think tossing some pure calcium into
my silicate "soup" should do the trick (with proper calculation of the amount, of course). So you're ading solid silicate eh?
Well I have noticed that waterglass can nicely bond silicate compounds, so it's not very surprising that it works out nicely with wollastonite.
It's not exactly the geopolymer stuff I was talking about, as that is generally an aluminosilicate compound with somewhere near equal amounts of Al and Si
in the silicate material. But what you describe sounds like a form of homemade calcite, so in that respect I think you're right in that it might make
a nice hot pad.
I recall from my waterglass experiments that mixing it with gypsum also resulted in a nice hard white material, lighter than gypsum and less crumbly.
Those cells never gave any proper output though, nor did my other attempts using calcium, so I didn't continue that line. Besides, gypsum is known to
be very porous and to absorb water from the air, and other experiments seemed to show gypsum is able to give a voltage but only until it has dried
out completely, and then the voltage drops to zero.

one thing I noticed on Reid's cell in the pictures he shows (the 'D' sized cell) it looks like it is poured, dried (or cooked) then during this process expands.  note how the bottom of the cell has "puffed out" from the tube form, like making blueberry muffins.  Then the cell has been flipped over with the top of the muffin on the bottom of the cell.  This tells me that some component in the electrolyte has expanded - my rough estimates from measuring/estimating the volume in photoshop is about 12% expansion.  I'm guessing that is causing an air entrainment.  Now, are these little bubbles important ?

I assume you are talking about the picture in his pdf portfolio? The one with the paper sticker on it?
Yes, that cell material has reacted in the tube. Yes, it forms bubbles while reacting. Yes, it does increase in volume a bit while reacting.
And as far as I know that cell was not turned upside down, but I am not entirely certain. That is one of his older cells and I have not seen it.
I have seen quite a number of his cells, but none of the ones I saw during my recent visit to him had that type of bulge at the bottom.
He and I have discussed our cell experiments quite extensively, and he has never mentioned turning his cells upside down. It may be that
he did upturn it for the photo, just to show a nice flat surface. But my guess is that it is either a bulge of welding material (used to seal the
bottom), or perhaps the bottom was not welded shut entirely and this bulge is just some of the cell material that got squeezed out during
the baking process. I am not sure.
In any case, the cells he showed me the other week don't have such a bulge, and I would not focus on it too much if I were you.
As for the bubbles, I think they are a result of the reaction and not intentional nor necessary. In my own cells I also get bubbles
sometimes, but I try to get them out during the cooking&baking process.
Also, and I am sorry that I cannot give more details at present, I do know that the method Reid used to produce his cells has evolved
over the years, and he used a different process around the time that picture was taken. I won't give a complete description, save to say
that that process was not very easy and some of the cells apparently exploded due to pressure buildup inside the cells, which were
completely sealed. Clearly there was expansion going on with no room to expand.

So, quick recap: yes, the stuff he used in the cell type shown on that picture did expand during the "baking" process, and the bubbles
are also a result of the "baking" process. No, the bubbles are not important.

In his latest cell experiments, Reid has been using an Argon atmosphere to make the cells. This is obviously intended to minimise any effect
air might have on the reactions inside the cell. As he is still working on them, it is not yet clear if that has a positive effect on output.
We also talked about other gases that might or might not effect the cell material...

Take a look at those 3 cells he's holding in that small pic of the barometer/thermometer demo setup I posted.
Now that is not the clearest pic and I will see about posting some more, but it does show what his latest
cell types look like. They look quite similar to the few I posted: just a metal tube with a layer of wax over it
to seal it from the air, with the cell material inside it. No material bubbled over the edge, and if all went well
during the production process also no bubbles inside it (or at least as little as possible; in my own versions
I try to get all bubbles out and I believe Reid does the same). (That pinkish stuff is the wax)

Now I have a few different cell type "lines" that I experiment on, so I can't really say none of my cells have bubbles.
But my "Reid cell" line has hardly any to none. My "metal oxide" line on the other hand, is very hard to keep
bubble-free, as a number of the oxides react quite aggressively inside the cells and the stuff foams and bubbles
like crazy sometimes. Of course it depends on what oxides I have mixed in, how much of them is in there,
what other materials are in the mix, how much water is in there, and how hot I "bake" them. But in general
those cells bullbe quite a bit and regularly they will start to solidify in that bubbly phase, so the material inside
turn out quite porous. In those cells I also try to keep the bubbling to a minimum, as I have the strong feeling
that bubbles are not good. Obviously bubbles are not beneficial to the materials final crystal lattices, or structural
matrix if you will, and this has great effects on the electrodynamic properties and processes inside the material.
So there's a little more on the bubbles for you. I would say: get rid of bubbles if you can.

[mdmiller]

@Koen1, thanks for the good info.  I'm not sure how much your are able to share, but the older cell has some interesting things going on.

May I ask, if you might be aware if these design parameters still being followed ?
  The casing is very thick, about 1/8"  (I'm assuming aluminum)
  There is some type of lining inside the casing, possible impregnated, thus the crystals adjacent. Is this a fiberboard material?
  The electrode is shaped like a paddlewheel (whoa, is that interesting after reading his COP paper) plus the electrode has one weak leg (thinner)
  The overall cell dimensions follow the law of squares
  The relation between the inner casing diameter and the electrode diameter follow the law of squares.

I've attached a diagram, many thanks for your guidance - Duane

[Koen1]

Okay, first of all, as far as I know the pic you attached is of a different cell than the bulgy&bubbly one referred to earlier.
This cell has the typical "new" folded central electrode; Reid has started to use such shaped electrodes not very long ago,
at most about a year or two ago if I am not mistaken.
Also, you can see that the cell material is a lot less bubbly. Just fyi.

The casing is very thick, about 1/8"  (I'm assuming aluminum)

Not strictly; the thickness of the metal should be enough to stay rigid during the production process,
and if you use materials that can react with the tube metal you should take that into consideration
when obtaining tubing (and take a slightly thicker tube to make sure it holds).
Also not necessarily aluminium, I have also seen cells made with iron tubing and with copper tubing.
The trick is to "tune" the metal to the material mix and other electrode metals used.
But in his older cells he did indeed use aluminium.

There is some type of lining inside the casing, possible impregnated, thus the crystals adjacent. Is this a fiberboard material?

No lining is used as far as I know. I think the boundary layer between the cell material and the metal may have a different colour than the
rest of the material, as I have seen this in several of my own cells. I shall ask Reid to make sure.

The electrode is shaped like a paddlewheel (whoa, is that interesting after reading his COP paper) plus the electrode has one weak leg (thinner)

This is not really a requirement, but more an advancement Reid found that such "cross" or "star" electrodes appear to result in higher output voltage.
This does however depend on the other metals used, and on the purity of the electrode. Most of his older cells have simple rods as central electrodes,
while most of his newer cells have such cross or star shapes. As far as I know the one thin leg is not important; it is probably just a result of the folding
of the electrode, and if may even be possible that the second half of that leg is there but does not protrude from the material... most I have seen have equal legs.

The overall cell dimensions follow the law of squares
The relation between the inner casing diameter and the electrode diameter follow the law of squares.

I am not sure. I know that the very early cells were quite large, about width of a coffee mug and twice the height.
There were even a few "artillery shell" sized ones. But quite a few of the newer ones are quite small.
I have one of Reids newer cells here for testing, it is only about the size of a thimble.
I do not know of any necessary "law of the squares" dimension specifications.
Can you please elaborate on how exactly the cells follow the law of the squares?
(could it be that I missed that completely? )

hope that helps. If there is anything that is not clear or that you would like more details on,
ask me and I will ask Reid next time we speak, should be later this week.

[mdmiller]

@Koen1, thanks for the info

the image was from a test on one of Reid's cells, sawn open, that was on the internet.  the weak leg looks intentional and I've seen it in other OU devices and since it's internal where the cell was sawn, it appears as an intended imbalance.  I think that's the foundation of OU.

Has he found the 6 legs of the electrode preferrable, Barbat had 6 coils in his generator, I've seen the number 6 come up in other OU devices.,

the lining in the image at least appears to be of some different material.  there is a distinct and consistent thickness to it whatever it is.

I'll back away from the law of squares statement for now and just refer to the basic dimensions as fib ratios, the cell dimension is 30mm:50mm overall,   = .6
the electrode diameter to the inner diameter of the casing is  15.7:24.36  = .64
the golden rectangle, the perfect harmonic, the venus synodic, the pyramids, ....etc.

Also, the diameter dimension of the paddlewheel electrode is extremely close, within fractions of a mm, to the wavelength harmonic used to resonate in your microwave, just an observation.  Is this dimension sized to some harmonic, maybe of electron spin or the frequency of the silicate electrolyte or something like that?

many many thanks I appreciate your guidance, -Duane

[Koen1]

Hey dang, you're right, there appear to be fibronacci series going on here...
I need to ask Reid about that, as he hasn't mentioned it yet... But surely it is not
coincidental.

You have some good points, I will talk to Reid and see what he says about the
one thin leg, the 6-legged star electrode, and the other stuff.

Could very well be that he planned those fib dimensions all along, and never told
me because I just happened to have picked very similar dimensions on pure gut feeling...
Ok not entirely gut feeling, but I can't explain how I got to those dimensions
in a very logical way, there was a lot of gut feeling involved
Thanks for pointing it out to me, I'm really impressed.
Would like to hear your "law of the squares" interpretation if that goes any deeper than the
golden mean relations...

Oh, and yes, the pic is of one of Reids test cells. But it is a relatively recent one,
as that pic was only added before posting his latest april 2008 version of his portfolio.
His full portfolio can be downloaded at http://www.vakuumenergie.de/doc/Portfolio_0408.pdf.
I assume you are working towards your own batch of experimental cells?