Before you write it off as impossible or crazy, please review just one video...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OklIm5a1Lc&NR=1
Kanzius.
Old news.
It's pretty funny to see a multi-kilowatt RF generator running a little LTD Stirling engine, with people standing around saying "this will free the world from the Tyranny of Oil"...
:P
Tinsel yes it is old news
and your point is well taken[LOTS OF POWER ]
small return
Still interesting!!
Chet
Quote from: ramset on January 02, 2009, 06:11:10 PM
Tinsel yes it is old news
and your point is well taken[LOTS OF POWER ]
small return
Still interesting!!
Chet
The resonant frequency of water is 45.8 khz. Instead of buying an expensive and inefficiant variable radio frequency transmitter, you can order the exact frequency crystal and plug it into an old analog radio transmitter which accepts these fixed frequency crystals.
If you take a radiowave transmitter with a crystal fixed on the resonant frequency of water, you can transmit the radiowaves through the vessel the water is contained in to destabilize the water molecules and cause the hydrogen to seperate with no additional input.
Quote from: OscarMeyer on January 02, 2009, 06:15:04 PM
The resonant frequency of water is 45.8 khz. Instead of buying an expensive and inefficiant variable radio frequency transmitter, you can order the exact frequency crystal and plug it into an old analog radio transmitter which accepts these fixed frequency crystals.
If you take a radiowave transmitter with a crystal fixed on the resonant frequency of water, you can transmit the radiowaves through the vessel the water is contained in to destabilize the water molecules and cause the hydrogen to seperate with no additional input.
You cant find old radio transmitter at 48,5 khz.
because this frequency is not used for radio.
(48,5mhz) possibly you will find
To construct sine power oscillators , with L and C
with tubes or transistor is not so great work
GP
I thank everybody for their great feedback! I don't care if it's negetive or positive! All feedback is greatly appreciated.
Now I realize that an analog fixed frequency transmitter will not effeciently work. How about a digital fixed radio frequency transmitter?
And if the digital RF transmitter is a good place to start, maybe someone who is engineer could suggest where to get the schematic. I am willing to buy all the parts and assemble them in my shop. Meanwhile, I'm searching the internet for simple digital RF transmitter schematics but so far have not found any that I can build.
When I build the transmitter, I am going to experiment with smaller 1/8 inch glass and plastic tubes. I will disclose my findings whether they are good or bad. If the findings are bad, I will try a combination of both radio waves and low amp electrolisis with stainless steel tubes.
All additional input will be greatly appreciated! I am not a radio engineer is why I need some help with the transmitter part.
Well, I just took the Gotoluc/groundloop h-bridge, and hooked it up with 24 VDC input from some LiPo batteries, and hooked the output up to a couple SS soupspoons submerged in tapwater, and drove the bridge at 48.5 kHz (and 45.8 kHz just to be sure) with a signal generator, and I didn't notice anything spectacular. Or at all. Even when I put a dash of vinegar in.
Straight DC from the batteries caused some bubble-ation.
Something tells me there's more to it than that.
Quote from: TinselKoala on January 02, 2009, 10:35:59 PM
Well, I just took the Gotoluc/groundloop h-bridge, and hooked it up with 24 VDC input from some LiPo batteries, and hooked the output up to a couple SS soupspoons submerged in tapwater, and drove the bridge at 48.5 kHz (and 45.8 kHz just to be sure) with a signal generator, and I didn't notice anything spectacular. Or at all. Even when I put a dash of vinegar in.
Straight DC from the batteries caused some bubble-ation.
Something tells me there's more to it than that.
Thank you TinelKoala!!! Great experiment! Knowing what doesn't work helps to avoid much wasted time. I do know for fact that radio waves alone are enough to release the hydrogen, but like you, I believe there is much more to it.
The transmission wattage, I'll bet, has a BIG influence on the amount of hydrogen released. Which brings us back to efficiency obstacles.
When I viewed the process, I remember that the transmitter was never submeged in the water. In fact, it didn't even touch the transmitter. I want to try aranging many tubes, and one donut shaped tube, where the transmitter is actually located in the center and surrounded by tubes of water. Adding stainless steel seamless tubes later will be interesting too.
I'm trying to get away from the piezo-electric sonic approach that is usually coupled with low amp high potential electrolisis in combination. I'm trying to move away from any mechanical means of distablizing the water molecules as such leads to frictional and gravitational losses. Not to mention and accidental explosion I had. OOOOOPS!
Hello Oscar,
Very interesting idea, but have you considered enclosing the water tubes (or donut shaped water container) with a lead cover? Surrounding the entire “cell†with a substance that reflects radio waves and sends them bouncing back through the water may give you more bang for your buck. It might help to solve your efficiency problems at the same time. This is providing your transmitter is located in the middle.
I’m not trying to be negative. I think you could be on to something if you make the process more efficient. The man in the video you posted is using concentrated radio waves to get the reaction he is getting. Also keep in mind that his water had salt in it.
Sincerely,
Joe
The idea that resonating the H-O bond enough will break it, is a good one, I think. But there are obvious difficulties. Even if the frequency is the correct one (and there are many versions of the "correct" frequency, from Keeley to Meyer to Puharich and back) there will be a problem coupling the power to the load effectively.
I have tried high-current capacitative discharges arcing through the water, with the cap bank's ringdown frequency tuned with added inductance to the chosen value, and that seemed to work, sort of. But there was a lot of other stuff happening then too...
One thing to watch out for is the evolution of steam or copious quantities of water vapor, not split into the desired gases, but masquerading as electrolysis output. It takes up volume but does not contribute to any burn energy. Pushing substantial power through a cell, whether mechanical, DC or RF, will always make a lot of water vapor along with the gases. So a good chemical dryer in the output line is essential for quantitative work, and cell temps should be kept down, regardless of power input method.
Quote from: TinselKoala on January 02, 2009, 10:35:59 PM
Well, I just took the Gotoluc/groundloop h-bridge, and hooked it up with 24 VDC input from some LiPo batteries, and hooked the output up to a couple SS soupspoons submerged in tapwater, and drove the bridge at 48.5 kHz[...]
Kanzius uses 13.56 MHz EM radiation, and you need to put salt in the water. 48.5 KHz is a suspected frequency for Keely's magic water dissociator, I think. His stuff was acoustic, so If you want to try that experiment instead, you should use an ultrasonic transducer.
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on January 03, 2009, 12:04:59 AM
Kanzius uses 13.56 MHz EM radiation, and you need to put salt in the water. 48.5 KHz is a suspected frequency for Keely's magic water dissociator, I think.
It is 42.8khz.
Quote from: chessnyt on January 02, 2009, 11:50:34 PM
Hello Oscar,
Very interesting idea, but have you considered enclosing the water tubes (or donut shaped water container) with a lead cover? Surrounding the entire “cell†with a substance that reflects radio waves and sends them bouncing back through the water may give you more bang for your buck. It might help to solve your efficiency problems at the same time. This is providing your transmitter is located in the middle.
I’m not trying to be negative. I think you could be on to something if you make the process more efficient. The man in the video you posted is using concentrated radio waves to get the reaction he is getting. Also keep in mind that his water had salt in it.
Sincerely,
Joe
I had not thought of reflecting the radio waves back through the water! Very clever idea! I hope you don't mind if I use it?
Right now, I'm trying to figure out which frequency to transmit. Some say it's in the kHz, others say it's in the mHz range. I can't build an efficient fixed digital radio frequency transmitter until I know what frequency it has to be able to broadcast.
I'm going to build part of the transmitter outside of the WFC and a small part is going to be located in the center connected by wires.
I also need to know what wattage or signal strength I need to broadcast at. For example, you could broadcast at 5Watts or 100 Watts. I don't want to waste energy by being too high or too low.
THANK YOU ONCE AGAIN, ALL OF YOU, FOR YOUR NEGETIVE AND POSITIVE FEEDBACK!!!!! ALL FEEDBACK IS WELCOME!!!!!!!
I don't care if it is even VERY negitive.
heres a little experiment I did with reflecting radiowaves in the microwave band.
Put a couple of drops of water onto a plate you dont care about. Then put a halo shaped piece of magnet copper wire in there. One you dont care about burning the insulation off of. Lay it in a hot spot inside your microwave resonant cavity.
Turn her on. Wait three seconds for the filament inside the microwave to heatup and start giving off some free electrons. Then you will see white sparks coming off the ends of the copper loop. Sorry the ends of the halo should be bent and facing straight up. Then the water droplets should start going plasmic and you get a very energetic conversion of water into something. Lots more energy than just a little yellow flame coming off the top of a test tube. When you open the microwave notice the abscense of any water vapor inside.
Isnt the frequency for water separation 42.7122kHz? not 45.8?
Mark
Here are some that I've come across:
Puharich (patent 4394230):
7960 Hz
15920 Hz
31840 Hz
63690 Hz
Stan Meyer:
937 Hz
JW Keeley:
42.8 kHz
Saul Hackmeyer (patent 4265721)
915 MHz
UV excitation (the true O-H bond resonance) is at 205 nm, which is very very high frequency...
And there are a myriad other freqs that have been mentioned in various places by various researchers. Any additions and/or corrections to this list would be appreciated.
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on January 03, 2009, 12:04:59 AM
Kanzius uses 13.56 MHz EM radiation, and you need to put salt in the water. 48.5 KHz is a suspected frequency for Keely's magic water dissociator, I think. His stuff was acoustic, so If you want to try that experiment instead, you should use an ultrasonic transducer.
We know the Carrier frequency to be 13.56, but we do not know if Kanzius modulates the carrier with an unknown wave shape and whether the effect is that of the Carrier or that of the Modulation frequency or a combination thereof.
And although his Transmitter may likely be capable of 1KW output it was adjustable and I do not recall Kanzius mentioning at what power Level the separation took place.
Responding to
Peses Comment about the Transmitter not being RF at 40 some odd Khz I like to point out that there are Naval Radio Transmissions of very high power being broad casted and received by receivers not using Transducers but Antennas. On the other Hand I do not recall having heard of a Navy Submersible producing Hydrogen from their Transmitting antennas which are in Salt Water.
Quote Google:
Very Low Frequency (VLF) communications transmitters use digital signals to communicate with submerged submarines on at frequencies of 3-30 kHz. The eighteen Trident submarines constitute about half the US strategic nuclear capability. The supporting infrastructure for these submarines includet connectivity links such as the Extremely Low Frequency (ELF), Very Low Frequency (VLF), and TACAMO Airborne VLF communications systems.
professor