There are text books in every corner of the globe with permittivity figures ranging from 78.54 to 81 for water but unfortunately none of them reference the Laboratory source or any experiment to support the figures.
A simple test measuring 12 volts and amps reveals the resistance the water has to DC.
The theoretical resistivity of water is 182k ohms but in the real world of DC its a alot closer to
100 ohms for 1/16 inch gap.
Can anyone find info that shows tests that confirm non conductance of water ?
Trying to prove that the text books are correct is as hard as proving them wrong.
pure water is non conductive. normal water is full of ions which carry charge.
easy to measure the increase in conduction as you desolve salt in water.
The problem is that only very very pure water has high resistivity. The presence of ANY trace of ions in the water ... like from dissolved salts or even contaminated containers or measuring electrodes ... will make the water conductive and screw up your measurements.
In fact, resistivity testing is how ultra-pure water is characterized. If the resistivity is more than 10 MegOhms per centimeter, you can be assured that your distillation/purification process is working well.
There are lots of references listed on Google for resistivity testing and dielectric testing of water. For example,
http://www.astm.org/Standards/D1125.htm
Too bad it's not a free publication.
The text books refer to "pure" water which is irrelevant in the real world where there is no ultra pure highly filtered deionised water in nature.
Water left to itself is self ionising /auto ionisation / auto dissociation ,a solvent and pretty much everything else but PURE !!
The relative permittivity list should high lite the fact that water rated at 80 is such an isolated case that it shouldnt even be there for practical reasons.
Permittivity is part of electrostatics while electrolysis is in the same book under organic chemistry.
That said ..check out http://www.powerlabs.org/waterarc.htm
What I shouldve said is : theres no Lab/text book example of a water capacitor for student replication.
Theres calculations etc for ceramic caps and problem solutions for students but nothing about water or pure water because they are obviously 2 different things.
That simple fact divides people.
It should state that Natural water has no relative permittivity simply because DC goes straight thru it .
Quote from: Torana on October 15, 2010, 04:08:35 AM
The text books refer to "pure" water which is irrelevant in the real world where there is no ultra pure highly filtered deionised water in nature.
...
"Pure" water is not irrelevant in the real word. Scientists know how to purify water, and use it.
See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purified_water
Nature doesnt produce pure water is what I meant .
As a commercial product it could be produced on a grand scale but it still hasnt got Natures stamp on it.
PURE water is clearly a processed product .
Again the relative permittivity scale should note that natural water has NO dielectric qualitiy at all.
Quote from: Torana on October 17, 2010, 10:02:35 PM
Nature doesnt produce pure water is what I meant .
As a commercial product it could be produced on a grand scale but it still hasnt got Natures stamp on it.
PURE water is clearly a processed product .
Again the relative permittivity scale should note that natural water has NO dielectric qualitiy at all.
who said ordinary water has no dielectric quality?
its the same stuff just with mobile charge carriers.
put a capacitance meter on an air cap and then flood it, c should go up 80 times.
please note water has a non linear respone to voltage so at low voltage tap water should work well enough.
as for natural just what tech has natures stamp on it?
more important what are you trying to do? you know lots about the subject so just what are you looking for?
fritznien
Ordinary water is clearly not listed on the scale .
A capacitance meter should go up 80 times compared to using air as the initial dielectric but it doesnt ,it goes everywhere,no matter how many times its tested.
In fact using air is the closest it ever gets to being a relable functional cap.
There are thousands of people trying to use water in a capacitor based on what Stan Meyers said but there is no example of ordinary water as a dielectric .
If there were then thered be a place for ordinary water on the scale . There isnt even a repeatable experiment to confirm pure water at 80.
I missed a bit there, Nature is the bench mark for all technology ,we specialise in below unity and consumption, thats where the money is.
Obviously there is a segment of society who seek more , thats why theyre here .
Quote from: Torana on October 17, 2010, 10:02:35 PM
Nature doesnt produce pure water is what I meant .
As a commercial product it could be produced on a grand scale but it still hasnt got Natures stamp on it.
PURE water is clearly a processed product .
...
"PURE water" is H2O molecules. A H2O molecule is pure and there are many in nature, even in intergalactic space.
By "not pure", you are refering to a certain quantity of water without any other molecule, that the nature could provide on earth and that it doesn't. Your viewpoint is anthropic, I don't see its interest in the frame of this thread.
You asked first "Can anyone find info that shows tests that confirm non conductance of water ?"
The reply I gave confirms that the scientists can purify water and have measured its permittivity. You can produce water with megohms of resistance, just follow their methods. Pure water is a reality.
Hi exnihiloest,
deionisation and purifying is a process that nature doesnt follow, its a commercial manufacturing process from a natural resource.
My initial question "Can anyone find info that shows tests that confirm non conductance of water?"
The Permittivity scale shows water at 80 , the more you delve into it ,every response youll ever find refers to pure water . But no actual experiment to support it.
Natural unprocessed water is not on the permittivity scale , simply because it conducts just as good as a copper wire , its the exact opposite of pure water.
I encourage anyone to try and stop DC passing thru water, the breakdown voltage is just over 1 volt ,Ive got 10 cent capacitors that can hold more than that .
A capacitance is calculated by Physical dimension = area ,distance and permittivity or the INSULATOR between the plates.
If anyone can find a replicable experiment (natural water)let me know because that means a theoretical capacitor can be used as a substitute capacitor in any electrical circuit WITHOUT short circuiting.
With an insulator , Current is the result of failure .
Pure water is a reality ,scientists have measured its permittivity ,its a commercial product with a manufacturers name ,trade mark and no doubt copy right.
Where does that leave rain water ,sea water ,tap water ? If they have permitttivity does that mean they too can be utilised as a dielectric?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ruudvankoten/4235278134/
See that bank of big jugs in the middle rear, with all the conductors going down to them?
Water capacitors, high voltage DC kind, otherwise known as Leyden jars. Ultrapure water isn't required, just enough current supplied to allow voltage to build in spite of the resistivity of the water being relatively low.
hi t-koala , Leyden jar is a good example ,Ive made and used them and also had them at school,
but the GLASS is the dielectric which has a rating of 7 in alot of text books and some rate 5-10.
The water is a conductor and that is its purpose ,mercury can be used but hasnt been used for a long time being poisonous. Water is the next BEST conductor.
The leyden jar has an external plate of foil or it can be sitting in a larger body of water which again is conductive. therefore being 2 conductive water plates.
Resistance is the reciprocal of conductance , R = 1 / G
A Resistor has conductance and Water in this case is the conductor with very little resistance ,thats why it is chosen for the job.
A dry leyden jar has 2 foil plates ,the top of the jar is sealed to avoid arc over.
People will have a hard time trying to find info to support the non condutance theory, theres nothing out there. Pure water does not represent ALL types of water especially tap water.
A water capacitor is not going to happen any time soon.
Any claim that uses a water cap surely has to supply that claim with a relevant cap measurement and construction details.
Capacitance is determined by physical dimension, C = er x e0 x A / d ,and permittivity.
Air =1 and has a breakdown Voltage of 3kv per mm
Pure water = 80 , theoretically a breakdown Voltage 80 x that of air =240 KV per mm.
1st problem= a functional cap is an open circuit to DC and will not pass DC (test for yourself)
2nd problem =any voltage less than breakdown V will not break down the dielectric which is the sole intention.
3rd problem= Natural water breaks down at just over 1 volt. (test for yourself)
It all leads back to the permittivity scale , either you use pure water with an assumed rating of 80 which means the text book breakdown voltage = 240 KV per mm , which also means the electrical circuit HAS to reach at least 240 kv and if it doesnt , where is the copious amounts of hydrogen going to come from??? dielectric breakdown???
Tf you use rain, tap ,sea or puddle water , what is the permittivity of that water ???
The general assumption is to go back and quote the permittivity scale which says ..80 .
Use 12 vDC + measure conductance of the water to determine if the water is a conductor or an insulator. (test for yourself)
Fundamental requirements for construction of a cap is 2 conductors separated by a NON conductor, NOT 3 conductors in a row , thats called a resistor.
For anyone to accept water permittivity as 80 , HAS to accept what goes with it, which is the breakdown Voltage of 240 000 volts per mm .
Well, OK, you make some pretty good points but I still don't think you are completely correct. I've just been looking at specs of many resistivity meters used for water testing, and even the cheap ones for consumer use go into the megOhms/cm range.
Im shocked no ones hauled me over for the balls up on the decimal. The devils in the details people
-Haste- on my part, sorry.
Air =3MV metre =3kv per mm
Pure water =30MV metre =30kv per mm
water ?? =24MV metre =24kv per mm
24 - 30kv is acheivable but then if water is converted to gas state (white water),permittivity drops
Air =1.00059 Hydrogen =1 oxygen =1
so again the permittivity of 80 goes out the window. So whats the break down voltage now?
3 kv per mm?
Why publish dielectric strength 24-30MV metre if water is capable of changing state?
Resistivity/conductivity meters use Alternating Voltage at 2 khz or so to avoid the plates polarising the water molecules. why??
What happens when water polarises? what happens when DC is across water?
A simple test using DC across water and measuring current with a regular old multimeter will indicate Resistance of a sample of water. R = V / I
As for inventors using a water cap , are they using pure water?
If they claim tap or sea water , to classify as a cap it HAS to be non conductive.
Fundamental characteristic of a cap = DC can not get thru
Quote from: Torana on October 21, 2010, 04:34:07 AM
...
24 - 30kv is acheivable but then if water is converted to gas state (white water),permittivity drops
"Water" is the layman term for H2O under liquid state so water permittivity is not the same as water vapor permittivity which is surely near 1 due to a very low density of matter.
Quote
...
Resistivity/conductivity meters use Alternating Voltage at 2 khz or so to avoid the plates polarising the water molecules. why??
What happens when water polarises? what happens when DC is across water?
...
A dielectric polarization consists in shifting the electronic cloud around the atom nucleus, along the electric field. With normal conditions and materials this effect is linear. A DC polarization doesn't change the AC polarization thus the permittivity is the same, at least at low frequencies.
The reason for using AC instead of DC is the same as for measuring a capacity (rather simpler with AC than DC) and to avoid chemical reactions of the remaining ions with the electrodes (oxydo-reduction).
Quote
A simple test using DC across water and measuring current with a regular old multimeter will indicate Resistance of a sample of water. R = V / I
You forget the redox potentials, depending on the density and type of ions. Even in pure water, there are some H3O+ and OH- ions.
"Water" connected with electrodes is not a pure resistance. U=R*I doesn't apply.
What is your goal? To prove that scientists do not measure correctly water permittivity, by proposing us incorrect methods using not purified water?
Im not trying to prove anyone wrong
fritznien =P W is non conductive
t koala =P W has resistivity
exnihiloest= P W is not irrelevant
fritznien =C meter on air cap...C should go up 80 times ( it should but it doesnt)
exnihiloest=..purify water,measure permittivity..you can PRODUCE water with meg ohm of R
t koala =leyden jars ( the dielectric?)
I agree with all the reply posts , Im questioning relative permittivity of pure water VS every other type of water that goes UNLISTED on the scale.
A leyden jar is an excellent example of a glass dielectric separating 2 water conductors, its 180 degrees opposite to a theoretical water cap which is theoretically pure water between 2 conductors.
Leyden jar is an example of water used in diametrically opposed function to the "cap".
clearly the permittivity scale is isolated to pure water and pure water ONLY.
The more you delve into it,you start to discredit stan meyer or anyone who claims to use tap or sea water as a component, whats the dielectric value???
I encourage anyone to do a DC test on natural water, if it conducts ,can that conductive liquid be used as a nonconductor between 2 plates and present an open circuit to DC???
...the same DC that was used to prove that it was conductive in the first place..
Simple fact is -A capacitor is an open circuit to DC, test one , anyone can do it.
A capacitor is a high pass filter , it blocks DC,thats why we use them.
Caps are measured in OHMS capacitive reactance not resistance.
Conductance is reciprocal of Resistance
Conductivity / resistivity is shifting into another area of testing
I hate to whack this with the "Simple Stick",
but isn't the real answer so evasive
as to be beyond all confirmability ?
It is the mixed question aspect of all this:
"How long is a piece of string ?"
The data required to answer this
just seems to be missing initially
from the question itself to me...
Raw H2O in a vacuum enviroment,
after a period of natural dissociation
to that vacumm enviroment,
will settle to be a very low value.
But tap water, nature's brook water, nature's pond water, laboratory purified water all lend a span of measurement so wide that the better question might be...why do you want to know ?
Purified water becomes useless as reference once exposed to our atmosphere anyway.
Water in It's own right has a form of memory to each and every substance it has ever come in contact with that to this day no one has yet to completely explain to satisfaction as it is.
So what inert material will this water under vacuum be withheld in for this test ?
If it is a form of plastic, there will be ions to contend with, a glass static charge carriers, etc.
Short of wandering out of our atmosphere into space and popping a couple of probes made of some material that water is not imprinted with to make this measurment, I cannot see this being successfully measured to any degree that could be held as a standard.
Then there is the ubber-amazing non-linear aspect of how water acts when it is used as the dielectric of a water capacitor.
This is awsome, and has caused life-long dedication to the study of this by many...
Sorry for pissin' on the Cherios...
Well, Torana seems to think that real, not ultrapure, water, or any substance with some conductivity, can't be used as a capacitor dielectric. Of course "that all depends". It all depends on the voltage and current available, as well as the characteristics of the container. I've done quite a bit of laboratory work discharging high-voltage arcs into water-filled chambers, and it's easy to see the ionization and electrolytic conduction phase of the discharge process on the scope traces.
But now I'm curious too. I'd like to see some real data, comparing, say, the polar liquid under question (Water) with a similar non-polar one (Carbon Tetrachloride, say) in a capacitor cell. I blew out my personal capacitance meter the other day, but maybe I can borrow one from somewhere.
Simple fact is a cap function is to block DC. DC can not get thru the DIELECTRIC / INSULATOR.
How often have you read of an invention that uses tap or sea water in a cap?
Simple test using DC across water will reveal if its conductive.
If its conductive , can it be used as a dielectric??
The answer is obvious....
Thru simple elimination the 'invention' did not use tap or sea water as a component of a capacitor.
No where in the thread have I mentioned my own testing , Its open for anyone to test for themselves ,for their own benefit and confirmation.
Permittivity scale is for pure water and pure water ONLY, . ..80 .
Anyone considering construction of a "capacitor" needs to be aware that all other types of water are NOT included on the scale.
The formula , C = er x e0 x A / d ,applies to a non conductor NOT a conductive liquid. It cant.
As soon as there is DC conduction theres an electrochemical process , now your talking free electrons and ions.
Permittivity goes in the chapter on electrostatics while electrochemistry is in the inorganic chemistry chapter , same book , different chapters. EIT reference manual .
HV water bridge is a good example of water conduction and experiment,try that one too.
Try testing over the counter capacitors , known functional capacitors.
OK you almost have it. "normal" water is complex stuff, it might help to think of it as a composite material.
pure water makes a great dielectric,dirty water makes a leaky dielectric.
think of it as a cap and nonlinear resister in parallel.
the only water caps i know of are used in large high voltage supplies for atom smashers.
ultra pure water with constant de-ionization, cheap to build and no toxic chemicals when they fail.
as for the invention of course it didn't work,what do you expect its been 20 years with no progress, no results.
mother nature is a blabbermouth all you have to do is ask the right question.
fritznien
1-the 'invention ' hasnt worked for 20yrs , does that mean weve shot down stan meyer?
2-does that eliminate tap water and sea water as a non conductor/insulator/dielectric ?
1 and 2 are the same thing , so now weve knocked out 2 types of water so far.
Dirty water makes a great conductor and produces Hydrogen when DC is applied.
Try testing distilled water , we might aswell knock that out too.
Two SS plates 1/16 inch apart and use 12v DC
1-use a continuity tester between plates
2-use an LED test light in series with 12v DC .
The model of a cap is equivalent series R , equivalent series L ,and Capacitance in parallel with insulation R . ( ESR, ESL , C and iR )
DC pretty much puches a hole thru insulation R in this case, current measurement gives
R = V / I ,Ohms law
HV pure water caps fail? I would assume the water dielectric is self repairing, what does it break down into?
Now we're getting to breakdown voltage , current is the result of failure.
According to the rules, electric current flows thru water by riding on the ions IN the water...?
Are they using circuit breakers ? why not go in series for higher V rating.
Absolute pure water has to be enclosed in a sterile environment or it would be contaminated.
If the dielectric is broken down ,does the enclosed cap have compensation for expansion of H2O,
like a Bucholtz valve? If it self repairs would that then create a vacuum ?
None of these ?? are directed at you or any individual ,it just raises even more questions.
HV Van De Graaff generator = electrostatic machine = DC output.
In this case the function of the cap is to BLOCK DC and store charge ,Q=CV, Uc = .5 C V^2
Only pure water can be used in the caps, all other types of water are conductive and have no dielectric value at all.
Permittivity rating of 80 applies to pure water and pure water ONLY.
Thru simple testing of conductance shows tap water fails as a dielectric of any kind.
Test an electrolytic cap with continuity for 10 secs, a fully charged cap is an open circuit.
DATA;
Stans original SS "water capacitor" dimensions ;
5" x 1/2" pipe plus 4" x 3/4" pipe with 1/16" wall thickness.
1; 5"=127mm, 1/2" =12.7mm dia
perimeter = 2 x pi x radius = pi x 12.7 = 39.898227mm
127 x 39.898227 = 5067.0748 AREA.
2; 4"=101.6mm, 3/4"=19.05mm minus 3.175mm =15.875mm dia
perimeter = 2 x pi x radius = pi x 15.875 = 49.872783mm
101.6 x 49.872783 = 5067.0748 AREA.
3; gap between plates =1/16" = 1.875mm { d } , between 2 equal size plates .
4; C = er x e0 x A / d = theoretically 2.27 nf (dreaming)
Its a personal choice to call it a capacitor, it all depends what the dielectric is.
DIELECTRIC;
Oxford dictionary = Insulating (medium or substance ) Non conductive, non conductor .
Collins dictionary = a material, as rubber , glass etc that does not conduct electricity ,non conducting.
Microsoft dictionary =...........?...
Dont use carbon tetrachloride
(I wasnt going to mention this because of the AC testing involved )
I DO NOT RECOMMEND ANY ONE PERFORM THESE TESTS, IF YOU DO, IT IS AT YOUR OWN RISK
************************************************************************
Theres another major problem with the water "capacitor" and thats capacitive reactance.
Xc = 1 / (2 * pi * f * C ) , frequency dependent formula
A simple test using 230 V AC 50 hz will reveal if there is Reactance or Resistance involved = Brute force test.
Theoretical C = 2.27 nano farad , single "capacitor" test
Predicted Xc = 1 / ( 2 x pi x 50 x .000 000 002 27 )
@ 50 hz = 1,402,246 ohm
@ 60 hz = 1,168,538 ohm
these figures would hold IF it was functioning as a Capacitor.
IF anyone were to do the test using phase and neutral ,theyll find the water boils in 6 seconds.
An alternative test is to use a diode or fullwave bridge rectifier ,which will give a 50 hz 1/2 wave pulse or 100 hz fullwave pulse ,depending on which is used.
The result is that it RAPIDLY pours Hydrogen for a few seconds before it too boils at 6 seconds.
V = 210 VDC , 5 amp .
How well does the Dielectric strength hold up ??
The next monster to raise its ugly head is Impedance
Z = square root of ( R squared + X squared )
If the water cap is subjected to AC or pulse of any kind , then it SHOULD present Z and SHOULD have a phase shift of 90 degrees leading . Z SHOULD equal X not R .
Theres a few sites which have C ,R ,Z figures which do not add up at all. I dont think many people notice the flaws. Murakami etc have NO numbers at all.????
TEST CELL
The pipes were cut to length on a lathe
The centre pipe has a bolt welded + centred on a lathe
The Formica plate is 1/4 inch , 10 " x 2 "
A pilot hole was drilled and a Hole saw used to cut a groove for the out side pipe
The centre bolt hole + groove were drilled at the same time in a drill press
Theres a uniform 1/16 " spacing
The outside pipe is press fit with sealant on the outside only
The bolt has Heavy duty cable heat shrink which gives an over all distance of 2 " insulation ,so the shortest distance is the 1/16 " between the pipes
The top has a Teflon sleeve glued to the rim so the water level is 5", equal to the centre pipe
Any Voltage, amperage,conductance test,continuity and frequency can be tested on a uniform sample of water between 2 equal size conductive surfaces
http://www.alexpetty.com/2010/09/17/water-as-fuel-with-puharich-and-meyer
Air test
freq C R Z
100hz 1485pf 1460k 850.2k
120hz 1461pf 1315.6k 769.3k
1khz 571pf 362.1k 218k
10khz 243pf 165.48k 55.3k
DC 1276k
water test
100hz 29.93uf 26.5 ohm 23.8 ohm
120hz 24.78uf 24.9 ohm 22.6 ohm
1khz 1.41uf 16.4 ohm 16.3 ohm
10khz .300uf 15.1 ohm 15.1 ohm
DC 940 ohm
Permittivity of Air = 1 Water = 80
water air
100hz 29.93uf / .001485 = 20,154
120hz 24.78uf / .001461 = 16,960
1khz 1.41uf / .000571 = 2,469
10khz .300uf / .000243 = 1,234
The difference between air and water cap should be 80 ,the figures above indicate permittivity between from 1200 to 20,000.
If the caps physical dimensions remain the same throughout the test then the permittivity of air also changed from 1 to 6.11.
The DC measurement should be open circuit for a capacitor.
The difference of DC R readings, 1276000 / 940 = 1357
The water "dielectric" is 1357 times more conductive than air. R = 1 / G . The path of least resistance.
Relying on capacitance meters across water will show false readings all day long. Dry and wet readings always go way beyond the text book 80 .
I havent shown reactance , when theres f and C ,theres Xc , Xc and R theres Z.
Im NOT knocking Alex Petty at all ,Im just interested in the figures presented , if anything its a good example.
Ive tested genuine air caps and the result was conduction all the way. A simple test anyone can do and see for themselves.
The cap on the left was submerged...
If breakdown voltage is 30kv per mm , it hasnt been reached in PWM electrolysis cells ,therefore no dielectric breakdown.
This was proven by Aaron Murakami, Dave Lawton, Ravi Raju, Bob Boyce, Fred Wells/FredWoods Will Power/ Fast Freddy and many others.
Collectively they unwittingly proved that a tap water capacitor is not possible.
If they intended on building capacitors ,they ignored permittivity, dimension, the capacitor formula or any approximation of capacitance measurement.
C = er x e0 x A / d , for parallel plates.
High power lasers and Accellerators charge pure water for only a micro sec , before the water has time to ionize and conduct, and thats using Pure Water.
One article here shows the model of a water switch, where "it" changes from a dielectric (off) to a resistor (on) .
The "self closing water switch" behaviour doesnt do much for the "water resonance" theory either.
Permittivity = 90
Marx generator and water cap
http://pps.coe.kumamoto-u.ac.jp/streaming/PulsedPower/generator/system1.htm
water cap and self discharge
http://www.el.angstrom.uu.se/meny/artiklar/dielectric%20study%20of.pdf
Sandia 6 MV dielectric breakdown tests
http://www.sandia.gov/pulsedpower/prog_cap/pub_papers/water_breakdown_tests_PRSTAB_2009.pdf
Sandia Water switching/ model /Acoustic wave
http://www.sandia.gov/pulsedpower/prog_cap/pub_papers/022611c.pdf
Steve from ionizationx did a straight forward C test on distilled water.
dry = 10 pf , R = open
Wet = 200 nf , R = 3500 ohm leakage
Everyone and anyone who does the same wet / dry C measurement on their own 'water capacitor'
will show a difference similar to Steves.
Ratio =200 / .010 = 20,000 , R = infinity / 3500 = Alot
If physical dimension hasnt changed through the testing then the only variable is permittivity of the dielectric
Permittivity 20000 instead of 80 ( 250 X ) , using distilled water not pure water or tap water
The more people that do wet / dry C and R tests the better.
The main focus has been the C measurement and R has been ignored even though it is the reciprocal of conductance , the basis of electrolysis.
R is constant and consumes power , a capacitor does not consume power.
Alex Petty C = 29.93 uf R = 940 ohm
Steve C = 200 nf R = 3500 ohm
J L Naudin C = 5.19 nf R = 2.9 M ohm
Steve and Naudin used distilled water , theres a major difference in R readings
J L Naudin Resonant LC circuit
reso frequency = 1 / 2 pi sq rt L C
= 1 / 2 x pi x ( sq rt , .246 H x 5.19 nf )
= 1 / .00022450763 = 4454 hz
..the centre frequency of these 2 components
A parallel reso LC circuit is an Anti Resonant circuit . The Anti reso / resonant freq of any circuit is very specific.
The permittivity of the dielectric ends up being fundamental to the whole concept.
Theres 2 ways to test the water cap
1 = straight to C meter probes
2 = in series with a known cap ,C1 , and treat as if it were 2 caps in series. C2 = water cap.
calculated with reciprocals
(1 / C measured) minus (1 / C1) = (1 / C2 ) .
following = water cap with 20 mm gap = 8.85 nf , 5mm gap = 35.4 nf
http://www.elkadot.com/en/magneticity/dielectric%20properties.htm
http://www.alexpetty.com/category/meyer
http://jnaudin.free.fr/wfc/index.htm
10mm gap , 130 kv , 300 nsec , deionized water and no breakdown.
http://resources.metapress.com/pdf-preview.axd?code=867765089j53p375&size=largest
So what the hell... since when permittivity is ohmic resistance?
Water permitivity is not the same as water ohmic resistance...
Minde
......CORRECT.
All R measurements are provided by the builders themselves using their own meters, on their own time not myn , Im just
not that keen.
Anyone testing their own "water cap" should pay more attention to their R reading of the conductive liquid between the plates.
Measure a DC V supply and then measure current thru the "water cap" , if current passes thru it , then its not a capacitor and theres no dielectric.
Gas formation is directly related to R and DC.
What kindve cap is that... liquid Rheostat , water Resistor , Solion ...
Energy dissipation occurs only in the resistive part of a circuit , since inductors and caps merely store and release energy.
R doesnt go away. R consumes power , X does not.
Most people dont have access to a Megger meter , its an insulation tester that sends a HV bolt thru a circuit, if theres leakage or short to earth or between phases the meter lets you know.
"Water cap" doesnt pass that test ,its over kill but still suitable test.
Meyers presentation is based on a parallel LC circuit, its an Antiresonant circuit with a rejection frequency f = 1 / 2 pi (sq rt LC ) , its a filter , radio ,electronics + aerial traps use them.
Series LC has a resonance freq f = 1 / 2 pi (sq rt LC ) , its a filter , radio ,electronics + industrial switchboards use them.
The Horvath patent / presentation has a non functional circuit to throw people off , Meyers and Puharich patents are no different
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/PatE12.pdf
The permittivity of PURE WATER is 80.. all other forms of water are not used as a dielectric because they are poor insulators and so they are not included on the permittivity scale.
Poor insulator = good conductor
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/capcyl.html
Alex Petty 2010
OD=.75" iD=.667 =(19.05mm, 16.9418mm) radius =.0084709 METRE
OD=.5" iD=.42" =(12.7mm, 10.668mm) r =.00635 M
Length= .250 M
gap= .0021209 M
1 dry =48pf 78.54 wet =3.79nf 80 wet =3.86nf
JL Naudin 2008
OD= 33mm iD= 30mm r=.015 M
OD= 25mm iD= x r=.0125 M
Length= .250 M
gap= .0025
1 dry =76pf 78.54 wet= 5.99nf 80 wet =6.1nf
Dave Lawton 2006
OD= 1" iD=7/8" =(25.4mm, 22.225mm) r= .0111125 M
OD=3/4" iD= x =(19.05mm, x ) r= .009525 M
Length =5" =127mm
gap= 1/16" =.0015875 M
1 dry =45.8pf 78.54 wet =3.599nf 80 wet =3.666
Scott Crampton ..
OD= .75" iD=.5944" =(19.05mm, 15.1mm) r=.00755 M
OD= .5" iD= x =12.7mm r=.00635 M
Length= .450 M
gap= .0012 M
1 dry =144pf 78.54 wet= 11.35nf 80 wet= 11.57nf
PARALLEL PLATES
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/pplate.html
Stan Meyers 1990
OD= .5", Length =5" =.0127 M , .127 M . .0127 x .127 x pi = .0050670748 M AREA
OD= .75" ,Length =4" =..01905 M , .1016 M
.01905 - .003175 = .015875 M , (minus wall thickness)
.015875 x .1016 x pi = .0050670748 M AREA
gap = 1/16" = .0015875 M
C = ? ..at least have a GO..
All calculations are based on the measurements provided by Petty, Naudin, Lawton ,Crampton, Meyers and Hyperphysics calculator.
The coax formula is for 2 conductors of the same length only.
Ravi Raju and others used unequal or random length.
Stans pipes have equal surface areas and can only be calculated using parallel plate formula not coax.
Once C is calculated it can be compared to Actual meter measurements to try and support the theory.
IF the C formula and meter dont match up or anywhere near , ...either the formula is wrong or the meters wrong or the calculators wrong or theres human error or.. the permittivity of the "Dielectric" is shot.
These calculations are ONLY as accurate as the permitttivity of the Dielectric, IF that is false then the entire concept is false.
Stans capacitor: ONLY as accurrate as the permittivity ......... (pure water )
1 = 28pf , 78.54 = 2.219nf , 80 = 2.26nf , 80.37 = 2.27nf , 81 = 2.28nf .
Inorganic chemistry : decomposition potential of water = 1.229 v DC
EE / Physics : Dielectric breakdown voltage of Pure water = 30MV per metre
Youtube has a mountain of examples showing decomposition of water , none of break down.
The 20/20 test = if you see bubbles of gas , then it is decomposition and it is NOT a capacitor or any example of dielectric breakdown.
A capacitor is an open circuit to steady current ,DC or a short to High frequency.
Xc = 1 / ( 2 pi f c ) ohms , the higher the freq ,the less the opposition .
It is a personal choice for anyone to call or name their construction a "water capacitor " but there is very little evidence to fall back on , to support it .
Pure water is the only option going , natural forms of water are not dielectrics.
Pure water is not naturally occurring , its a manufactured , processed product with parameters and grades and also trade marked .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purified_water = Milli Q by Millipore corporation
ANYONE building a "water cap" has the option of calculating the predicted capacitance and then a digital capacitance measurement.
Theres the old saying "measure twice and cut once "
If theres 2 measurements .... which one ? either , neither , double check or abandon .
NO permittivity = no dielectric = no capacitance = no reactance .
Quote..." no dielectric breakdown ..." suggests no dielectric = no capacitor .
gas production indicates conduction , = resistance
poor insulator = good conductor .
pos electrode , neg electrode , Electrodes , suggest an electrolytic cell NOT a capacitor .
Aaron Murakami obviously abandoned and deleted any info relating to his "water cap" project .
He was using tap water which straight away narrows it down to pulsed electrolysis / decomposition. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floating_water_bridge HV bonding , deionised water http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_thread_experiment http://www.niell.org/exploding.html Power dissipation thru water as a LOAD resistor http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/quantum/sodium.html ionic solution http://www.jossresearch.org/tjiirrs/015c.html Water capacitor using pure water
@Torana
Quite a few statements of yours I don't agree upon.
First: DIELECTRIC is not the same as INSULATOR. Dont get confused.
Water is quite a strong dielectric ~78 value BUT tap water is poor ohmic insulator.
Polyetylene is poor dielectric 2-6 value BUT strong ohmic insulator.
Only by applying ohmic insulator on water capacitor tube surfaces and preventing amp flow water capacitive properties will jump out to daylight because of such a high dielectric value. All you need to do is isolate opposite plates. Tap water is poor ohmic insulator due to all of contaminates in it - however distilled water is quite good ohmic insulator because of missing contaminates.
"...NO permittivity = no dielectric = no capacitance = no reactance" = crap ;)
Minde
ANY / ALL Dictionaries , even microsoft works.
Dielectric =" not able to conduct direct electric current,and therefore useful as an insulator."
INSULATOR DIELECTRIC CONSTANT
HV glass transmision line insulator glass leyden jar 5 - 10
HV glazed ceramic/ porcelain trans-line insulator ceramic cap 5 - 7
mica stand offs / dividers mica cap 4.5-7
oil impregnated paper insulated cable paper cap 2 - 2.6
AIR Air cap 1.0
Naudin and Aaron murakami used coated pipes. The water is not the dielectric ,the water is now an isolated Resistance , internal resistance. murakami abandoned his .
Ive just had a look at Naudins video , never seen it before , dated june 2008.
.."high flow of gas " ?? looks alot like decomposition ,only alot less than usual.
Naudin used distilled water and the surface is covered in brown sludge , a clear indication of a mini joe cell sludge fest all over again , does not look good .
A cell and a capacitor are 180 degrees opposite .
Dielectric breakdown , IF that is the aim , happens beyond the dielectric strength and in a HURRY.
**Relative permittivity of the insulator coating ... = a dielectric = capacitive component of a capacitor = Xc ....,when frequency is applied or ... IF DC applied = open circuit .
The INVERSE is ; No permittivity = NO dielectric = No capacitor = No Xc ....
Non Conductor , Inverse = Conductor
Insulator , Inverse = Conductor
Dielectric , Inverse = Conductor
Whatever you say man... I see no point to argue with you here.
Appereantly many of your "dictionaries" are wrong. Because dielectric is NOT the same as ohmic insulator.. altho all insulators have dielectric values but thats not the same as ohmic value.
It is the way it is and no dictionaries can change that.
I just wish you kept your personal theories to yourself.. so many others would not be misguided by reading your posts..
Minde
I havent put any personal theories forward ,everything is text book.
I refer to ANY/ALL dictionaries because of easy access , I cant expect people to read Electrical ,Electronics dictionaries ,glossaries + books because I know people by choice ..WONT.
Relative permittivity ,dielectric constant are not measured in OHMS , they never have been and I certainly have never said that.
Naudin ,Alex Petty + Steve provided R measurements , NOT ME. Good for them , IM NOT knocking them - Why would I .
No dictionary states that dielectric constant is resistance.
Dielectric constant is fundamental to capacitor design and calculation.
Data sheets for caps , cable , semiconductors state the insulation R , 10,000 M ohm etc .material.
There is how ever only 1 person who stated the Dielectric constant is measured in OHMS....
I'll start next post with the numbers......... in a sec....
WFC tech brief Super F, The birth of new technology .
ALL data supplied by Stanley A Meyers 1995. ****NOT ME****
*memo WFC420 =Natural water ( dielectric constant 78.54 @25c ) section/page [ 1-1 ]
Fig 1 - 1 = V . I . C ( A-A ) , Natural water ( dielectric liquid ) [ 1-13 ]
*memo WEC422 DA = The dielectric properties (insulator to the flow of amps) of Natural water (68) of fig (3-28) as to fig (3-26)(dielectric constant of water being 78.54@20c in 1-atm)[3-8]
-The established reso freq is most generally in the audio range from 1khz up to and beyond 10khz;and is dependent upon the amount of contaminates in Natural water [3-16]
*memo WFC426= The established Dielectric value of water (85) being78.54 OHMS [7-3]
-rain water (850) being an liquid insulator that restricts the flow of amps.....a resistive liquid
(having an OHMIC value of 78.54 OHMS.) [7-4]
-The dielectric property of water (being 78.54 OHMS @ 25c ) [7-8]
-The dielectric property of water and its resistive value is typically (78.54 Q ) [7-11]
Fig 7-1 V.I.C Impedance network =Natural water ,dielectric liquid resistance.
Fig 7-4 Electrical charging effect = Dielectric liquid of water (85) ????
Fig 7-15 Dielectric value of water 78.54 OHMS
*memo WEC 427 Water bath (85) is a Dielectric liquid (typically 78.54 OHMS )
*memo WFC 429 Fig 10-1 V.I.C ,water Dielectric value 78.54 OHMS
PAY ATTENTION TO THE OHMS ...next post....
Dielectric constant is fundamental and essential for ALL capacitor design and calculation .
IF ...the fundamental basis of Stan Meyers PR info is false then he alone has been misleading and misguiding people and his entire info is questionable.
This could have a wide effect on all Stan Meyer devotees and replications.
Personally I think Minde is absolutely Right.
1. Since when is permittivity ohmic resistance ?
2. Water permittivity is not the same as ohmic Resistance .
*** Since Stan Meyer said " The Dielectric property of water being 78.54 OHMS @ 25 c ."
*** ...."a resistive liquid ( having an OHMIC value of 78.54 OHMS )."
Surely I am not the only person who spotted this, its been there for 15 YEARS !!!
Everyone is going to rush off to check their stash of Stan info, good on ya.
#4,936,961 Patent 1990
Stan Meyer refers to and quotes
1 ;Handbook of chem + physics ,68th ed ,CRC prss 1987-88 sect E-50 H2O =dielectric constant
2 ;SAMS Modern dictionary of electronics, Rudolf Garff ,1984 Howard W. Sams +co pg859
=charging choke
Theres no excuse to get it wrong when anyone can get it right.
NO dictionary or book is going to state dielectric constant as 78.54 OHMS.
All electrical and electronics dictionaries are similar enough in their content and descriptions
A charging choke is a series component / circuit.
If its a recurring TYPO then he had 3 years to correct it =1995 to 98 . That leaves the possibility that the tech Brief is full of typos and IF thats the case then the Brief is an unreliable source.
I AM NOT KNOCKING STAN MEYER OR RESEARCHERS ,ITS A PERSONAL CHOICE WHAT PEOPLE BELIEVE AND NONE OF MY BUSSINES OR INTEREST .
WFC tech brief -1995 Stanley A Meyers.
(this is only SOME of the formulas that need replacement) (theres more..)
eq1; Zseries= Xc-Xl section -page [1-2]
eq5; Vt =IZ OLUNS law [1-2]
eq6; VL= Vt Xl / Xl-Xc [1-3]
eq7 Vc= Vt Xc/ Xl-Xc
"restrict DC current flow beyond XL" [1-4]
eq9; Z=R1 + Z2 + Z3 + Re "Total Resistance " ? [1-4]
" Re = dielectric constant of natural water " ...a RESISTANCE ?
memo WFC 421 Spark ignition tube "BUM rate " [2-1]
gas ignition process "BUM rate " ? ? ? (Tariff )
Delrin material (72) is not factored into eq8 or eq9 ,But dielectric constant ...IS ? ? [3-11]
FIG 3-30 , 3-33 , 4-6 , = K shell has 6 electrons . Fig 5-12 has 8 electrons ? [3- 42]
eq 19 wa = LI sq / Z [7-6]
eq 21 C= .2249 e A / d E [7-8]
eq 9 Total V I C "circuit resistance " to DC current flow . Z =R1 + Z2 + Z3 + Re [7-10]
A choke coil of 11.6 K ohm ? Re = water 78.54 Q ....a resistance ?
eq 24 Z = Xl - Xc "in terms of component reactance , inductors (L11L2) should ALWAYS be larger than cap (ER) of fig 7-2 .......... OPPOSITE OF eq 1 ? (7-10)
The dielectric Value of water 78.54 inhibits amp leakage INTO the water bath ? ? [11-4]
**The tech brief is a bench mark for misinfo + misguidance ,so quoting it- is just as dodgy.
Again its a personal choice or belief if people want to follow it.
Hello everybody
I did simple experiment.I immersed two flat electrodes 60/60cm
into bucket full of tap water and then i connected 1V DC to
electrodes .After while i reconnected to electrodes LED diode and
diode lit for 15 sec.
I think this is prove that i had water capacitor.
Now my question.
What would happen if we have -say-ten simple water capacitors and charge them in parallel then by an switch to connect them to serial
circle.Would flow higher current through serial caps?
Ive done this experiment before and got the same results .
*Rain water , 100mm plates , 3mm spacing , LED = 5 - 10 secs.
I can confirm what your saying and what youve done , again it is a personal choice for anyone to call it a capacitor .
If diodes and LEDs are tested for capacitance you will get a reading. (or any semiconductor)
LED = 12 - 17 pf
IN4007 = 27 pf
UF4007 = 42 pf
Are they capacitors ?
Forward bias ,they conduct and reverse bias theyre an open circuit , just like a capacitor to DC.
Further investigation is up to you or anyone who does the same test , its easy and straight forward.
Quote from: kadora on March 06, 2011, 11:40:02 AM
Hello everybody
I did simple experiment.I immersed two flat electrodes 60/60cm
into bucket full of tap water and then i connected 1V DC to
electrodes .After while i reconnected to electrodes LED diode and
diode lit for 15 sec.
I think this is prove that i had water capacitor.
Now my question.
What would happen if we have -say-ten simple water capacitors and charge them in parallel then discharge caps in serial circle.
Would flow higher discharge current through serial caps?
(Im guessing the above ^ is directed at everybody..) ?
The dielectric constant / permittivity scale has no units ,its dimensionless , its a Ratio and NOT measured in OHMs .
Dielectric constant of Air or vacuum is 1 = the reference number
Air = 1 , water = 80 , the ratio = 80 : 1
eg ,ONLY ; If an air cap = 40 pf , and then water is added and measured at = 1.23 uf , the ratio = 1.23 / .000040 = 30750 : 1 ( based on someones actual measurements )
Most water caps will give a reading around 20000 times the air measurement. theres no average.
Its a simple thing to do , compare the 2 measurements taken and divide 1 by the other , take the ratio and enter it into the Capacitance calculator as the Dielectric figure and youll see your meter reading appear.
Which should reflect the accuracy of the C calculator , the C meter and the Ratio in 1 hit.
**This is simply disecting the capacitor formula to get a picture of what IS between the plates.
A constant of 20,000 ? ..sound reasonable, peculiar, strange , thru the roof, a recurring oddity...
The difference is OFF the chart , once this test is done, the text book cant be quoted as 78.54 or 80 .
The formula C = e0 er A / d
e0 is a constant and wont change, A wont change , d wont change, er is the ONLY variable there.
The hyper physics calculator uses METRIC ONLY , uf on the left , pf on the right , tap the word *capacitance* for total. Enter ratio in ' K ' . Plate area A , gap d , your on your own.
CONCENTRIC = http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/capcyl.html
PARALLEL = http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/pplate.html
You may find this relevant
http://www.btinternet.com/~martin.chaplin/microwav3.html
MP , Yes , Thanx.
The ratio of the constants transfers over to freq and X calculations, using Air =1 as the reference.
Using 40 pf as an example at 10 khz, Xc = 1 / 2 pi f c
40 pf @ 10 khz = 397887.36 ohm
3.2 nf @ 10 khz = 4973.592 ohm
1.23 uf @ 10 khz = 12.939426 ohm
397887.36 / 80 = 4973.592
397887.36 / 30750 = 12.939426
( Calculating a compatible L for reso = Xc / 2 pi f , because Xc = XL .)
Another example using the ratio and 1 coil.
A; = 40 pf and 10 mH , f = 1 / 2 pi ( sq rt LC )
f = 251646.06 hz
Xc = 15811.388 ohm = XL
B; = 3.2 nf and 10 mH
f = 28134.884 hz
Xc = 1767.7669 ohm = XL
Af / Bf = 8.9442719
AX / BX = 8.9442719
square root of 80 = 8.9442719 ( sq rt 30750 =175.35678 )
Usually the ratio doesnt go over 40 but can still be applied no matter what the number is.
But it just reinforces the HUMUNGUS ratio figure that should be 80 in a perfect world, IT deserves attention..
Im using other peoples measurements that are beyond my control so that its ALL about numbers ONLY and NOT a personal theory.
Water Air Ratio
80 / 1 = 80 : 1
130 uf / .000025 = 5200000 : 1 Actual test
200 nf / .010 = 20000 : 1 " "
29.93uf / .001485 = 20154 : 1 " "
** e = Cs / Cv . Cs = sample Cv = vacuum . Water being the sample specimen.
Theres nothing to panic about for anyone testing their cap / cell , BUT it is clear indication that theres more to it than just 2 SS plates slapped together in water , which is a Debye molecule , polar dm.
A cap dielectric sets up an opposed field 180 degrees to the external field that cancels the field.
good example is hyperphysics .
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/dielec.html
-" Electric flux does not pass equally well through all materials, it cannot pass through conductive metals at all , and is cancelled to various degrees by insulating ( dielectric ) media "
..theres still the debate whether Hydrogen is classed as a metal . (diff story )
A faraday cage is a polarized hollow conductor with zero internal e.f , but so is a solid wire .
Im still on the hunt for rain water constant and tap water , chlorinated water close enough but keep searching.
http://asiinstr.com/asiadmin/ForceDownload.asp?varFileName=Dialectric Constants.htm&varFileType=DATASHEET
http://orioninstruments.com/html/tools/dielectric.aspx
http://www.rfcafe.com/references/electrical/dielectric-constants-strengths.htm
Anyone testing Ice will find R readings too, theres permittivity figures from 1.7 - 115 depending on test freq , Ghz.
If a model was used to represent the water cap it would have parallel C to the max, obviously many times larger than calculated capacitance , and low parallel insulation R .
R being the reciprocal of conductance G .
The model of a crystal = ESR ,ESL ,C and parallel C
The model of a cap = ESR ,ESL ,C and parallel iR
Sandias water switch model has parallel Cw ,Rw .
I found a doc = ' Defence special weapons agency high voltage breakdown studies " , tagged -declassified- but it dissappeared on me or I was blocked.
It went into 304 SS,different metals and Rudenko + Tsvetkov HV water tests , it was 130+ pages from dtic.mil
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic .........................tax dollars at work ,so might aswell use em, they use you!
http://search.nasa.gov/search/search?baynoteOrGSA=baynote&nasaInclude=dielectric+properties&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&client=nasa_production&oe=UTF-8&actionType=searchIndex&numgm=5&site=nasa_collection&proxystylesheet=nasa_production
....................................more tax dollars..
IF Delrin is used on plates , it eliminates 304 ss in any way necessary , IF theres no physical contact with the water ,it can be any non magnetic metal OR any type of water which also eliminates electron extraction ...thru the plates.
If theres no electrons entering , theres no electrons leaving either.
First time Ive seen Stan meyers WFC international news letters , Pat Kellys site.
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/P7.pdf
11 A# Fall 1996 page 9 top = " Water dielectric value 78.54 OHMS " ? ?
10 # May 1994 page 6 top = " Dielectric value of water 78.54 OHMS " ? ?
Dielectric constant is NOT measured with an OHM-METER .. HOW ? ? ?
IF stan meyer was Ex-military then he would know the value of strategic embedding misinformation , its deliberate.
" The truth shall set you free " ...... does that apply to stan ?
A discussion over water , out side of the free energy type forums...
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/65068-resonant-frequency-water-distilled-how-make-speaker-play-underwater.html
Plasma speaker/ singing arcs = an audio signal (music or fixed freq) goes into a FBT pri and the HV sec arc has an audible out put. kindve like the keanue reeves movie ,Chain reaction.
*****Legend has it that the inventor of the plasma speaker died from ozone poisoning*****
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_speaker
Good description of FBT , power inductors...
http://www.butlerwinding.com/store.asp?pid=28196&catid=19973
http://www.butlerwinding.com/store.asp?pid=28336
Real good example of clarity of singing arc...
http://wn.com/vladimiro_mazzilli_zvs_flyback_driver?orderby=relevance&upload_time=all_time
Basic circuit of Mazzilli ,1/2 way down..
http://sites.google.com/site/uzzors2k/flybacktransformer
****A Mazzilli circuit is a resonant circuit on steroids and not to be stuffed around with especially hooked to the mains***** . The pri coil is the only alteration needed.
IF or WHEN water is used - you will see if water is behaving as a Resistance or a Dielectric .
This is a good test for Delrin water caps . DC CANNOT GET THRU A CAPACITOR and any testing should reveal a few things.
A smoothing cap goes from HV pos+ output to earth , some already have them inside , others dont. (that would be a parallel cap)
Large projection TV FBT seem to be crap in comparison to computer size CRT FBT.
External ,series caps on the out put are DC blocking caps (coupling caps) **optional/experimental.
If used ,the legs can be covered in sheathing from wire off cuts + coated with polyurethane to seal and insulate.
The sec is full of diodes so its the quickest way to get HV DC with out stuffing around with transformers and winding ratios and AC .
I had a look thru my old notes of testing similar to Kadoras set up .
with charged plates continuity is one way and open the other way, the same as if testing a diode fwd and reverse bias.
If it were modeled it would be more like a zener and R , once theres overpotential , current flows and electrolysis begins. ( for continuous current)
The model of Sandias water switch is the same on a large scale, no continuous current= no electrolysis.
Intrinsic properties being permittivity + conductivity, high polarizability and non linear R.
The tests didnt include Capacitance because plate area ,spacing gap and dielectric constant didnt go near calculated capacitance VS measured capacitance.
Testing was done with .1 uf cap in series to block current on the neg side ,with 12 VDC across the lot.
Other testing was done without .1 uf cap + 1 to 2.5 VDC.
**capacitance test is NOT done on a charged cap, they are always discharged ,it can damage a meter.
Heres an example of the Imperial cap formula that Stan meyers "fiddled " in the WFC tech brief EQ21 ,sect 7,page 8 C = .2249 e A / d E (??)
Actual REAL formula ; C = .2249(KA/d)
http://www.learn-about-electronics.com/the-farad.html
This an example of Stans elongated molcule, normally called distorted electron orbital path.
http://www.learn-about-electronics.com/capacitance.html
H20power.. (oouch)
If you have 78.54 ohms **R** I have no problem with that. (An R decimal indicates a meter reading) Note that R, X, Z and dielectric constant are 4 diff things.
Stan Meyer repeatedly printed 78.54 ohms as dielectric constant of water, WHY would he print a LIE to the people supporting him on the ride up ? ?
He didnt live long enough to see them on the way down.
No one can stand by that statement ,it cant be written or measured in ohms, its a RATIO it has no UNITS...NONE.
Stans income was from the free energy market , who happen to be 180 degrees to the target market = The MAJORITY/ GENERAL PUBLIC/ GOLDEN GOOSE ...WHERE THE MONEY IS.
Stan is the person who was denying the world WFC tech, HIS only possible Allies could be GOV ,MILITARY,AUTO, NASA or LARGE FINANCIER... ALL of which are already tied together interdependently.
Nowhere have I doubted HIS invention , to do that is to write off Puharich + Horvath, HORVATH is the only one still alive, No One talks of him.? ? ?(lucky him)
I respect the time and effort youve plugged away at WFC theory, NO ONE can knock you for that.
WHY would I ? ?
I DO NOT agree with anything stan said or wrote, anyone can double check his formulas , its an easy exercise and presents a clearer picture.
I havent read your thread , I just do not have the time , I dont come here often. (Its DATED).
Nothing Ive written is knocking you ,How you interpret that I dont know, IF anything its encouragement.....
***tau = CR *** , Xc and XL are not invited.
** IF you calculate magnification of your coil ,youll be SHOCKED!!
I wouldve thought you would be on =ionizationx.com , surely theyre like minded and probably welcome you with open arms.
http://www.ionizationx.com
http://www.ionizationx.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=rj6aj7bp878mv0mdu48n1tvq22&action=register
..Reread your post and I think you nailed it in one
"you do not aid humanity in any way shape or form towards being energy independent"
Youve said what Ive been trying to get across, I have Quoted **Stanley A Meyers**, word for word,section and page number, trying to point out that he was misleading.
They are **HIS ** words **NOT MYN**, HE wrote them.
Minde4000 helped out there big time , he opened that can of worms .
The news letters and WFC tech brief are hollow and have no value at all.
We all have the benefit of hindsight of Stanley A Meyers , so with Honesty , ask yourself,
**HOW did he actually aid humanity in any way shape or form towards being energy independent?
..drawings? formulas? scripture? donations ? newsletters ? WFC tech brief ? Patents ?
**HOW would he benefit from sharing his circuit or technique to penniless peasants ? ? ?
NOW ... IF 78.54 ohms is now considered to be Z matching, the formula is now...
R + Xl + Xc + Z X C
That makes it worse than before.
I started working on Industrial Switch gear in the 1990s
I first heard of Stan in the 90s
I was actually trying to HELP you .... Best of luck
http://www.learn-about-electronics.com/rc-time-constant.html
http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_1/chpt_16/index.html
http://elkomak.4t.com/catalog.html .. built this one, nice
http://www.bcae1.com
http://www.learnabout-electronics.org DC transients mod 4.3
http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_1/chpt_16/index.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dielectric_constant
Its not fair for me to say ....."anyone can check his formulas"
So Ive got the disc in front of me , IM going to go thru each formula (yawn) , Ill do them in maybe 3 batches over the weekend.
IF a formula is correct , itll be labeled so
IF a formula is BOGUS , itll be labeled so and the correct formula next to it
Theres an interesting twist in those formulas which will upset things and the full picture will reveal.
**BOGUS = not genuine , Collins dictionary.
EQ 1; Z series = Xc - Xl correct but not complete .
At freq below resonance , Xc is larger than Xl , so the remainder is Z = X
At resonance Xc is equal to Xl therefore Xc - Xl = zero , result Z = R , a resistive circuit
EQ 2; Xc = 1 / 2 pi f c correct (capacitive reactanc)
EQ 3; Xl = 2 pi f L correct (inductive reactance)
EQ 4; f = 1 / 2 pi sq rt (L C ) correct ( Resonant freq)
EQ 5; Vt = I Z correct (Ohms Law)
EQ 6; Vl = Vt Xl / Xl - Xc BOGUS (Ohms law Vl = I XL)
EQ 7; Vc = Vt Xc / Xl - Xc BOGUS (V x ohms / ohms ) ? ?
EQ 8; Z = sq rt R ^2 + ( Xl - Xc )^2 correct ( impedance)
EQ 9; Z = R1 + Z2 + Z3 + RE BOGUS (EQ 8 is used) ( RE = dielectric constant ? ? how?)
EQ 10; E = I R correct (ohms law for DC )
EQ 11; P = I E watts correct ( POWER basic form )
EQ 12; A = F / M correct-ish (Newtons 2nd law of motion F = ma , newtons.kg.metre)
EQ 13; F = q q1 / R^2 correct (coulomb force)
(mutual force F = Q1 Q2 /d^2 ,F = Q1 Q2 / e d^2 , separated by a dielectric) Q = es units ,d = cm ,e = permittivity
EQ 14; V = q / e R BOGUS (this is semi EQ 21 , denominator is distance and dielectric)
EQ 15; R s= Vin - V led / I led intensity ? correct-ish (This is a series resistor selection formula)
EQ 16; Pwatts = Vcc It parallel array correct (without parallel R or G calculation)
manufacturer lists power rate and freq IF its a flashing LED
EQ 17; Le = sq rt Ion^2 T1 / T1 + T2 BOGUS ( liminous intensity = candela )
****SECTION 3 PAGE 8 = REPEAT EQ 1 to EQ 17 = FILLING ****
EQ 18; Ein = Md C^2 correct I GUESS ,Einstein-ish
http://www.worsleyschool.net/science/files/emc2/emc2.html
EQ 31; E = hv correct-ish , h= 6.547 x 10 -27 erg , BOGUS
E = hv = hc / lambda , h = 6.626 x 10 -34 J.s , 6.62 x 10 -27 erg sec , v = frequency of em radiation
EQ 32: hv / c momentum of photon , correct (magnitude of momentum hv / c = h / lambda )
c = quantum of em energy ? (c = light speed in metres )
FIG 5 - 11 Optical photon , planck = 6.547 x 10 - 27 erg sec BOGUS
SECTION 7 page 4
Resonant charging chokes (614/615) 36 AWG =.006 BOGUS
SECTION 7 page 5
Primary coil (622) 22 AWG = .028 BOGUS
Secondary pick up coil (623) 35 AWG = .007 BOGUS
36 AWG = .00500
35 AWG = .00561
22 AWG = .02534
http://www.bulkwire.com/wiregauge.asp
LIKE IT MATTERS . .... to be continued.
EQ 19; wa = L I^2 / Z BOGUS ( stored energy = L I^2 / 2 OR .5 LI^2)
EQ 20; L = .8(NA)^2 /6a+9b+10c correct (this is an AIR CORE COIL) Wheelers formula
http://home.earthlink.net/~jimlux/hv/wheeler.htm
EQ 21; C = .2249 eA /c Eo BOGUS "permittivity (Eo) of the dielectric property of water"=crap
"Eo =free space permittivity of water" more crap.
(imperial C = .2249 KA / d , OR metric C =e er A/ d ,written as C = KA/d , permittivity of free space =8.854 x 10 -12, for conversion , the inch = 25.4 mm , so 8.854 x 25.4 = 224.9 , pico farad being 1.0 x 10-12 ,the same as the free space figure .)
EQ 22; area (A) = h/2 (a + b ) Tapered Resonant Cavity correct ( Huber / Smalian formula for parabolic Frustum)
http://mathforum.org/dr.math/faq/formulas/faq.cone.html
EQ 23; Circumference Surface point (E9) = pi D correct (A CIRCLE = 2 pi radius )
EQ 24; Z = Xl - Xc correct "in terms of component reactance, inductors (L11L2) should ALWAYS be larger than capacitor"
(for Xl to be larger means freq is above the resonant freq ,therefore Z = X for a NON RESONANT CIRCUIT , at resonance Xl = Xc)
SECTION 7 page 10 REPEAT EQ 9 BOGUS ... and Filling .
EQ 25; Ep / Es = Np / Ns and Ep / Es = Is / Ip correct ( this indicates a step down transformer)
EQ 26; T = Ns / Np correct ( this indicates a step up transformer )
" Turns ratio of VIC transformer (26/52)...each bobbin cavity adhering to EQ 20" AIR CORE? ? ?
EQ 27; Z = T ^2 correct ( N ratio = sq rt of Z )
EQ 28; M = La / 4 BOGUS ( Lma = Lta - Lto / 4 ) ( + Lta = series aiding , -Lto = series opposing ) The next formulas are tied together.
EQ 29; Lt = 1 / (1/L1+M + 1/L2+M) BOGUS Transformer Lt = L1 + L2 +/- 2M
Series L = L1 + L2 , Parallel + 1 / (1/L1 + 1/L2)without Mutual L . Mutual L ; M = sq rt L1 x L2 Or M = k sq rt L1 x L2 , k = coupling coefficient
http://www.daycounter.com/LabBook/Mutual-Inductance.phtml
EQ 30; Ltcc = L1 + L2 + 2M choke coils , correct ( above)
Real time ....how I wish this wasnt happening .
THIS HAS GOT TO BE THE ICING ON THE CAKE, THE RICH THICK CREAMY BIT..........
GASOLINE = C10 H8 BOGUS
C10 H8 = NAPHTHALENE aka MOTHBALLS INSECTICIDE
http://www.chemspider.com/Chemical-Structure.906.html
NATURAL GAS = C5 H12 BOGUS
C5 H12 = PENTANE ,the LIQUID
http://www.chemspider.com/RecordView.aspx?rid=95fe0516-eac9-4a79-8475-ca31155a0a44
H2
C H4 methane
C2 H6 ethane
C3 H8 propane
C4 H10 butane Natural gases
C5 H12 pentane
C6 H14 hexane
C7 H16 heptane
C8 H18 octane
C9 H20 nonane
C10 H22 decane
C11 H24 undecane
Gasoline = 5 to 11 carbon atoms per molecule.
Youll never see H2 at the top, it used to be called HYTHANE but an AMERICAN company snapped up the word .
Heres the real kick in the balls , IF anyone /site , supports , encourages , promotes or uses Stans writtings as a source of reference or info towards free energy , they are in actual fact suppressing free energy , FREE of charge on BEHALF of the energy industry AND the shareholders.
The responsibility shifts to anyone who WAKES UP (reminds me of the matrix movie) once they KNOW the WFC tech brief is BOGUS , they can not un-KNOW it...
Anyone who continues (there will be) to use the tech brief is under self hypnosis and denial.
Stanley A Meyers knew his audience better than they knew themselves.
Do your self a favour and learn electronics, its dying out ,2 years ago Dick Smith electronics dropped its component range = NADA. Other companies will follow.
So there it is ,in real time , STANLEY A MEYERS , $35 a RIDE..... Ouch!!!
cutting edge, I didnt even spot that one , maybe I coulda shoulda done the same..thnx
Heres Stans "memo WFC 420 " - 214 page pdf , its the same and as good as " Birth of new technology" OR " Water Fuel Cell Techical Brief " , and no doubt the same $35 shafting fee ,plus postage.
For anyone who wants to double check stans formulas . All wording is by **STANLEY A MEYER**
not ME .
Pat Kellys site....
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/P8.pdf
**Collins Dictionary;
Deceive: to make (a person) believe what is not true
Pretence: A false show of something
Pretext: A false reason or motive put forth to hide the real one
Swindle: to get money or property from (another) under false pretences
? ? ?
Heres Stephen Horvarths 1976 Patent 3980053
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/PatE12.pdf
http://www.stephenhorvath.com.au
Before Stan Meyer there was Henry Puharich and before him there was Stephen Horvath.
Horvath is the only one who is still alive. He had a 1974 Ford Fairlane V8 sedan running on water.
Heres some notes on the circuit layout , which in basic form is a fullwave pulse gated by a SCR.
page 6 = fig 3 circuit
page 20 = component list
page 20 = Tr1 300 v @ 22 A ( try calculate input using ratio 18 : 1 , ...MUCHO ! ! )
- R1 and C2 = timers for UJT relaxation oscillator
- R2 and R3 = intrinsic stand off ratio
- UJT has saw tooth signal which is usually used directly triggering a SCR
- SCR = phase controller or if DC is used , switches off for any reason current stops
- C3 , R4 , Q2 , R5 , R6 , C4 , R7 are not necessary ( thats why theyre there)
- D1 and D2 are connected reverse to a normal fullwave rectifier
- R9 and R10 are permanent connected conductive path to earth
- Q3 and Q4 are connected opposite to a normal push pull centre tap primary
- Transformer TR2 secondary has an isolated parallel LC ....
...**** This completely rules out Electrolysis as an option of this circuit.*****
What does this patent cover ? UJT ..2N3055.. ...D...C...R....frequency....electrolysis.....transformers...push pull...sawtooth ...fullwave...DC ripple...AC..passive components , active components ? ?
Patent title does not relate to patent circuit, patent circuit does not match function of electrolysis, Patent description does not explain non functional circuit.
The Horvath patent is one of the best examples , because of the detail, that shows that a patents contents are not instructional and its not a manual or reliable source of info
Collins dictionary;
Patent = an official document granting the exclusive right to produce or sell an invention, process , etc
Manual = a handy book of instructions , etc
WFC International Independent Test Evaluation Report 1995 .
Another $35 thank you very much...
Heres stan meyers 140 page pdf , WFC Project Binder 423-DA ,from pat kellys site.
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/WFCreport.pdf
page 5 "Purpose of Content"
"establishing the dielectric value of water as being 78.54 ohms"
IF...there was a genuine independent report of the content of thse 140 pages , it would note that dielectric value of ANY substance is not measured in OHMS, relative permittivity has no units , its a ratio.
Resistance is not a dielectric value...........establish this first.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_(data_page)
http://www.ozh2o.com/h2phys.html
page 20 ; figure AA = V I C . "water dielectric value 78.54 ohms"
This diagram is invalid simply because of this Resistance measurement.
page 22; figure 8XA = V I C diagram
page 23; figure 8XA1 = V I C AA ( typical parallel allude)
page 24; figure 9XD = Voltage regulator PC9XD card
page 25; figure 9XB = Variable pulse generator
The basis of this circuit is a fullwave rectifier with a SCR gate with a trigger circuit = 555 based
The Horvath circuit is a fullwave rectifier with a SCR gate with a trigger circuit = UJT based
The question is ....How does a SCR switch off ? ?
Page 64; C5 H12 Molecular Structure of Natural Gas . = ( B O G U S )
What independent evaluation would allow this to slip by unnoticed ? ?
http://www.chemspider.com/RecordView.aspx?rid=c7675b45-9ebb-4a5a-b6a4-75696d906f90
This is PENTANE , the liquid .
There are affidavits throughout about SS304 , plexiglass, water samples , people building their own renditions + witnesses.
There is no over all independent test evaluation of his circuit + its function ,that would breach confidentiality.
People need to do their own evaluation of stan meyers info instead of stans independent evaluation of himself
This file has no value at all.
WFC memo 420 page 1 !! .... Stan Meyers words not MYN
"the dielectric properties (insulator to the flow of amps) of natural water ( dielctric constant being 78.54 @ 25c) between the electrical plates (E1/E2) form the capacitor (ER).
Water now becomes part of the VIC in the form of "resistance" between electrical ground and pulse frequency positive-potential_ helping to prevent electron flow within the pulsing circuit (AA) of fig 1-1" *****(fig 1-1)
The first sentence uses the word insulator ,the second sentence uses the word resistance.
A capacitor is not "resistance" , Impedance = frequency dependent , zero freq= open ,
open = zero current.
1; fig 1-1 VIC (AA) parallel circuit . section 1 page 13
2; memo 429 fig 10-1 , 970 VIC sect10 page 9 "water dielectric value 78.54 ohms"
****within the same pages of "birth of new technology"
3; WFC International Independent Report page 20 ,fig (AA) VIC "water dielectric value 78.54 ohms"
****same diagram as memo 429 fig 10-1
4; WFC International news release issue 11 A 1996 ,page 9
-970 WFC VIC "water dielectric value 78.54 ohms"
**** same diagram as memo 429 fig 10-1
http://www.icubenetwork.com/files/watercar/non-commercial/stanley_meyer/News%20Release.pdf
***Fig (AA) VIC = Fig VIC (AA) = Fig 1-1
...remembering "dielectric constant 78.54 @25c" ..then diagram "water dielectric value 78.54 ohms"
Does Stan Meyers first statement nullify fig 10-1 and fig (AA) because theyre measured in ohms or does fig 10-1 and fig (AA) over ride his statement ? ( how ? )
They cant both be right , ones a fact and the other is NOT.
This has influenced alot of people who dont know the difference, which cant be blamed on them but it seems to have set like concrete.
Heres another one ......
http://www.icubenetwork.com/files/watercar/non-commercial/stanley_meyer/News%20Release.pdf
1; WFC International news release issue 10 1994 page 6
"analysis of water "dielectric value of water 78.54 ohms"
2; Birth of new technology WFC , section 7 page 24 , fig 7 - 15
760 "thermal explosive energy of water " , "dielectric value of water 78.54 ohms "
These are the same diagrams under different headings .
** R and D laboratories , a certified biological testing laboratory, columbus ohio.
Test method = Spectrophotometer analysis
contaminates= sodium (NA) and potassium (K)
http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectrophotometer
The samples are measured ,Parts Per Million = ppm , NOT explosion rates or OHMS ...its a biological testing lab ,........that may or may not have existed .
No Lab any where will measure a dielectric constant in OHMS , this is Stans manipulation .
SIMPLE EXPLANATION OF MEYERS FUEL CELL TECHNOLOGY , Rea Oneill , DUBLIN .
http://jnaudin.free.fr/wfc/WFCexpl.pdf
page 1, 2; affidavit of his visit 28-7-93 , Rea Oneill ,If anyone wants to try and find him Im sure hes not bound by any confidentiality agreement....any more.
http://www.dit.ie/tools/contacts/departments
page 3, 4, 5, 6; Explanation of Meyer fuel cell, Oneills theory of WFC operation.
5 khz superimposed on field coils and 1/2 wave rectified to allow the capacitor to discharge?.
(1/2 wave being 50 % )
page 7 to 10; Appendix 1, Haber cycle etc
page 11; The Helium atom + diatomic molecules pg 521
page 12; Appendix 2 , Electrical current
Similar to forced oscillations circuit described in text and designed to maximise.
1; Field coils = 5 v , 2 amp
2; Alternator driven by 2 KW motor
3; Inductance = unknown
4; Condenser = formed from 8 - 10 , 1/2 inch SS tubes surrounded by 3/4 inch SS tubes wired in parallel ** { C = obviously UNKNOWN }
page 13; Capacity + Inductance pg 685
page 14; Electrical oscillations pg 686
According to Oneill , the caps are wired parallel, IF... Oneill is correct, does that mean the 'series cap guys' are wrong OR IF the 'series cap guys' are right ,does that make Oneill an unreliable witness?
Page 2 is Oneills affidavit of his visit and personal impression of stans character.
page 3, 4, 5, 6 is Oneills personal theory/explanation of WFC without measurements.
At the end of the day his theory is as good as anyones guess, and its back to the drawing board...
Basically theres nothing else on stan meyer I can find , years ago I had the NZ pack but that went up in flames .....trying to extract something from it . I live where the NZ video was filmed .
http://www.alexpetty.com
This guy keeps himself busy long time , well worth checkimg out. Got to respect the guy he transcribed stans Denver 97 video. Ive been through stans videos thru the years and theyre pretty much rehash/ presentation but this ones got MALLOVE.
What stands out in all his videos , stan repeatedley said hes a BUSSINESSMAN .
19:49. "now the technology of using water as fuel was actually invented and developed through the eyes of a BUSSINESSMAN. Under the law of economics the guy who comes up with the cheapest way is going to win out. You know there are alot of Cadillac ideas that come into existance but they dont apply the law of economics and they never really get out the door"
Does it make good bussiness to give away intellectual property ?
" " " to release a circuit diagram for $35 ?
" " " to reveal circuit design / function in a patent ?
IF the answer is NO ,then all of stans available info has nothing of value in it, the bussinessman was NOT selling the bussiness , certainly wasnt giving it away.
Ive made notes from the video...
NOTE; STAN MEYERS WORDS FROM HIS MOUTH , NOT A. PETTY AND CERTAINLY NOT ME.
03:23 " I just simply asked the prayer to GOD ,I said -GOD I love my country ,its the greatest country in the world: I have been all over the world, if YOU will help ME put a power supply in the country Ill do anything YOU want to do" and subsequently I was filled with Holy spirit , I exercised all the gifts of the Holy spirit and this is how Ive been bringing the technology in"
fig 12 = BOGUS = 78.54 ohms 8XA
fig 17 = BOGUS = 78.54 ohms , Analysis of water
fig 48 = BOGUS = 78.54 ohms 8XA (fig 12 )
20:41 " now we got into a very interesting part is that when we tune into the dielectric value of water you go into atomic resonance"
-dielectric value is permittivity or a constant, what about
"tune into the dielectric value of GLASS ,you go into atomic resonance"? ? Air = 1, glass = 5-10 mica= 3-8 paper= 3.5, water=78.54, its a RATIO, theyve all got values. Its been used to confuse,and it has.
27:21 " creativity comes from GOD- if its beneficial for mankind- and I just simply asked a prayer to GOD , If YOU show ME a way , I love my country, its the greatest country in the world, Ill do anything YOU want ME to do"
In hind sight GOD obviously didnt want stan to show us too , OR maybe GOD did and stan made the wrong deal with the wrong dude.
Wonder if stephen meyers made the same deal/ prayer ...
29:05 " we neede to PROTECT the military integrity of the US" (? ? define integrity.)
32:45 "the Lord says to ME -we have eyes but we do not see, we have ears but we do not hear"
45:56 " we are tuning the dielectric value of water and this acts as an amplifier that allow the electrical stress to be amplified and compressed and this allows us to oscillate the water molecule atom"
-A microwave oven is allowed to oscillate molecules .... "the dielectric value" ? ?
you dont tune "IT" ...."IT" is a constant , again, what about , Air= 1 , glass = 5- 10 ,mica= 3-8
etc . With LC circuit ,you find the frequency of natural oscillations, you can even use an L C selection chart.
51:06 , 35 USC 101 code in the US patent office
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_35_of_the_United_States_Code
Does that mean show operability therefore you dont have to reveal HOW it works ,just that it does? so even the patent office doesnt know.
OH LORD NOW ITS GETTING INTERESTING...
***51:54 "WE (?) can demonstrate the technology, we can say its here but in actuality IT WILL NOT BE STAN MEYERS to bring it in. It will be either you or I, the guy down the street who will come together to bring it in.
Otherwise I DO NOT BELIEVE AN ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOURCE WHEITHER WFC OR OTHER WOULD EVER COME IN. Its going to be mandated by the people to try to reverse the environmental problems, the environmental damage nthats actually occurring"
-Excellent- make a deal with GOD and then shift responsibility on to the peasants, that sounds familiar, its the peasants who fund the war ( military integrity) ,its the peasants who foot the bill.
At the end of the day 'WE' are over spending so up goes inflation and tax.
** Stan said the technology isnt comming out. as of may 1997
So does that clearly indicate that the Tech Brief is NOT in any way an instructional manual/ diy kit as most want to believe ? ?
People have committed years of thier lives to that thing (probably longer = prediction)
Does that clearly indicate that he did not release a circuit ? ?
So what are all these "replications" of ? DC or DC pulse , fullwave or 1/2 wave , In phase or out of phase, RESONANT ? -thats AC, who said it was resonant ? ...rectified = 1/2 wave.
**55:38 "Stan Im EUGENE MALLOVE .....(Independent Energy magazine)
"If you will just do one thing: Just let us test it , will you allow us to test it? "
57:26 " Where are the numbers ?.. thats what I want to see "
57:57 "I AM NOT WILLING TO VIOLATE MY DEVELOPEMENT RIGHTS TO REDUCE IT DOWN TO PRACTICE" as of may 1997
-NO testing, NO description, NO circuit released , NO relevant info released into the public domain , its locked away for a long time.
He said ,51:06, "the scientific community " tested it ? Does that violate his developement rights prior to may 1997 ?
Obviously Eugene Mallove had a hard time finding any datd anywhere, theres a good chance there never was any tests.
STANLEY A MEYERS, " I DO NOT BELIEVE AN ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOURCE WHEITHER WFC OR OTHER WOULD EVER COME IN"
"IT WILL NOT BE STAN MEYERS TO BRING IT IN" as of may 1997
How people couldnt hear these words years ago , shocks me. He said it . No doubt itll hit a few people when they double check. Some wont.
So not even GOD could make him do it, thats a bussinessman to the bitter end. Who suppressed WFC ?
Who suppressed Yull Brown ? = Yull Brown
" " Stephen Horvath ?= Stephen Horvath
" " Henry Puharich ? = Henry Puharich
" " Stephen Meyers ? = Stephen Meyers
" " Stan Meyers ? = Stan Meyers
" " John Kanzius ? + John Kanzius
Reading thru Stans info and videos , NOWHERE could I find Stan promoting/ advocating the concept or objective of INDIVIDUAL INDEPENDENCE /FREE ENERGY , that only encourages the whole system to collapse = economic suicide, Bad bussiness and bussinessmen dont like that at all.
He said " you have to maintain the industrial-economic base and the integrity(?) of the military"
Does that include civilian contracts, black water, reconstruction, covert corruption, market stimulation ?
On the fundamental level , Protect the share holders interests, screw the workers.
Gov, military and industry are the same thing . GM bail out is a classic example...nicely done ,well executed (executive)
Tax payers/consumers are the HOST, no system can allow individual independence, its social engineering/structure/natural order/ the economic pyramid.
Stan said he was a BUSSINESSMAN not an inventor... and its bussiness that got him in the end and put him in the ground. Live by the sword, die by the sword , it sounds like divine justice.
Pass the ammo, if theres any left...
these people refuse to believe in the laws of physics no matter how much they fail in any of their projects. everyone of their projects is a failure period.
over unity, where is all the projects proven to the world without a doubt, there is none and will be none. over unity can not even be achieved with anti-matter to matter reactions due to neutrinos. there is no over unity.
it's a pipe dream and will remain to be a bait to all those whole follow it.
Jerry 8)
Unity ? how about this....
theoretical speed of light = 299,792,458 Metres sec
permittivity of free space = 8.854 x 10 -12
permeability of free space = 1.2566371 x 10 -6 (4 x pi)
C squared x permittivity (electro) x permeability (mag) = 1 , unity
...yea its text book ...anyhoo
It might look like I launched an attack on all things stan meyer but thats not the case at all.
Thru the years I havent seen anyone step out of line over stans info , its completely unbalanced view where no one dares to question the sacred scrolls of stan meyers.
Theres 50 (32 + 18) formulas /equations(?) in the Tech Brief , 15 are completely BOGUS , thats
30 % ! .... SURELY thats enough to set alarm bells ringing.
BOGUS CIRCUIT DRAWINGS ARE ALSO A FINANCIAL DETERRENT = EXPENSIVE DOOR STOPS / PAPER WIEGHTS OR WHITE ELEPHANTS....EVENTUALLY.
Research requires ground work to double check formulas ,theory and any references in order to find a foundation but if that is not there ,its all over...NO MONEY SPENT. (YAY)
**Theres only 1 video segment that stands out and can be seen as clear evidence , thats his early bench top display showing the presure gauge climbing which also means theres increasing presure on the rising bubbles.
Theres 2 possibilities at that rate ,= Gas or steam , steam shows condensation that cant be hidden.
If there was V and I readings that segment would be rock solid ,theres no electrolyte or gas processor.
Stan said " you have to ask the right question"
Most obvious question should be 1# ; After spending $1,000,000 on patents , why would stan give away the circuit for $35 ? ? ?
He wouldnt show Eugene Mallove or Walter Rosenthal anything so what value is stans info to anyone if it was of no use to these 2 genuine researchers .
Walter Rosenthal was a leading test engineer.
A report from either of these men would be reliable and complete , the Dublin report and International Independent report are SHOCKING with no content and absolute rubbish, compiled by stan himself ! Independent ?
Another good trick stan utilised was Auto Suggestion.. k.i.s.s = keep(56) it(22) simple(72-A) stupid(AA) dont(46) think(22-A) for (44) yourself(77) and(41) dont(23) step(A1) out(A2) of(57) line(F_1) you(F-2) might(45) give(35usc) the(101) game(78) away(9-11)
Here we go again..(got another one)
@ ALL..
nowhere have I said his invention didnt work
nowhere have I said it cant be done or impossible
nowhere have I discouraged anyone directly or indirectly
I was told I was misleading and putting personal theories forward , everything is text book and using other peoples data so that it is beyond my control and cant be manipulated**
IF it irritates people to see stans info hacked open...thats a GOOD thing, its called waking up.
Whats wrong with doing an HONEST UNBIASED breakdown of stan meyers info ? ? ?
who does it hurt ? and WHY ?
http://www.free-energy-info.com/P8.pdf
Anyone seeking truth and hidden secrets in stans Tech Brief have to face the facts...there aren't the kindve secrets people would hope for.
THE TRUTH INDICATES DELIBERATE INTENTIONAL DECEPTION.
I put forward plenty of examples to chew on ,instead of pointing the finger at me have a go at stan meyers....what have I done ? ? ?
EQ 6 ,7 ,9 ,14 ,17 ,19 ,21 ,28 ,29 , have a GO
GASOLINE C10 H8....= NAPHTHALENE , moth balls ..classic.
How can people NOT see that one ? ?
These are examples of stans secrets hidden in his info.
It is only FAIR that I show stans info as an example of MISINFO for those who dont know what misinfo looks like.
As for sacrifice , what did he sacrifice ? ....in hind sight , his country, the environment + people ,good thing he didnt have kids or he'd sacrifice them too.
He was not a messiah or savior, it makes no difference if hes alive or dead, he did not give away his circuit, info or product and NEVER would, thats not good bussiness, bussiness is TRANSACTION.
Stephen meyers is still alive , does it make any difference? HE could
stephen Horvath is still alive, does it make any difference? HE could
Stan Meyers WAS alive , DID HE MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE? ? HE COULD HAVE
Stan meyers as a "christian" is irrelevant,, "jesus is lord" is irrelevant, stan was a bussinessman, that is relevant to money and people as customers not brothers and sisters or Gods lil' flock
A bussinessman can not betray his own Nature = Bussiness -before- man.
People need to read his info without being so biased and prejudice. Look beyond the "jesus is lord" and "God I love my country"
READ FIRST , then judge...evaluate...you might be surprised and find clarity.
Next Im going to reach into my old pile of crap and pull out stans 1989 NZ house meeting, its on VHS and from the 90s so it wont have - time of quote - written next to anything.
I tried to find a link on youtube , couldnt find anything any where . So this ones for the cave men out there , ..power to ya.
Theres no way Im going to transcribe this damn thing , I have very little interest in its contents but from memory theres a few swifties in there , Ol stan doing the shifty, straight as a dogs hind leg he was.
Second thoughts , the box is even too ugly, I cant face this thing , it can wait till tomorrow.....
It hasnt got copy right written on it either .. oh yay what gold..
Quotes of stan meyers NOT ME **
This has not been fun at all , Ive only done some obvious bits in the first 1/3 of the tape , stuff the rest.
According to stan ,
Patent office = "why has no one else thought about this technology before?"
stan = " ..but here to fore (?) anyone EVER dreamed of using potential energy to form a voltage to perform work in order to pull apart the water molecule"
Making these claims is dismissive to previous inventors, their work and actual inventions.
Does that imply that Horvath and Puharich had plain ol electrolysis ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selden_patent
The Selden patent did the same thing with road locomotives
Bell labs did the same thing with the transistor
Points to one thing , MONOPOLY and Market Domination
Resistive choke discussion;..resistive wire etc
Stan; " in filing of patents , I* filed them in several ways -"then he says I use it this way"... you have a hard time* getting around me because not only have I filed patents on the particular technology but I filed patents on all its related areas to give me a technological buffer zone to be able to ensure that I* can bring the technology in"
(**Stan;" it wont be Stan Meyers to bring it it" -1997 Denver)
"well sorry folks I got it both ways"
"and if you look at all OUR (?) patents , you apply voltage across that water molecule youve violated my patent rights"
That sounds alot like the MONSANTO attitude towards nature, very christian. It also indicates the Monopoly bussiness mind.
The Tech Brief is Stans technological buffer zone to keep replicators going in circles, which is demonstrated year after year.
VIC Discussion;
Stan; "if I hit this at 10 khz would this NOT increase it to 20 khz?"
Stan; "so not only is this a pulsing circuit to restrict amp flow, it also is a frequency multiplier.....and GUESS what else ?....if I was going to increase more Hydrogen gas yield ,what else would I do?"
response; "increase the voltage"
stan; "yes ,now how would I do that ?"
" would I need to change the pulsing circuit here?"
response; "just change the amplitude of it"
stan: "all I have to do here is just increase the number of turns of this coil, would I NOT ?"
(* NO , more turns = more inductance = lower frequency = pulse circuit change of frequency, the centre freq has SHIFTED )
The circuit drawn on the blackboard = Fig 1-1 (AA) , is not a pulse forming network or Voltage doubler. It is not in the same catagory as a Villard gen , Marx gen, CW cascade or pulse forming network , which are all V doublers.
LC in parallel can be called Parallel resonant , Anti resonant , a Trap or Tank but none contain a diode , half wave rectifier.
VIC Discussion;
As soon asthe locals question Inductance in milli Henries or frequency, stan shifts to the other black board.
Stan; "when you release the energy from the water in the form of the Hydrogen gas ,its energy yield is 2 and 1 half times that of gasoline...note the rule of thumb , its not 2 and a half times that of finger nail pollish , its not 2 and a half times that of butter ......its actually 2 and a half times that of gasoline........OK now ?......OK?......all right.."
**ATTENTION SUCCESSFULLY DIVERTED AWAY FROM QUESTIONING = DELIBERATE DIVERSION,
DID HE ANSWER THE QUESTION?
Stan; "the action is really hitting it with the voltage, when your tuning into the resonance and when you hit in resonance under this condition, then the water molecule just falls apart..... OK? ...so ahhh.."
question: "yes but Im asking , what is the resonant frequency of water ?"
Stans reply; ...? Stan launches into water quality , contaminates, ppm etc
IRRELEVANT REPLY = DELIBERATE DIVERSION, DID HE ANSWER THE STRAIGHT QUESTION ?
Stan ;" under the law of physics says if I got an oxygen atom here thats got ahh...3 missing electrons alright.. there fore I can ...suck it off the ground of earth..see ? to bring them back to stabilize"
(OR ....the negative plate , IF it is a capacitor , its supposed to be according to stan but then Rea Oneill said the water was the source of Voltage but then stan just said electrons can be sucked from ground, what happened to displacement current ?)
The thread "relative permittivity of water" = fundamental basis of a water capacitor.
Stan doesnt mention effective electric field, internal field 180 degrees to external, opposition, displacement current ,dielectric losses ,hysteresis etc.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/dielec.html
http://www.jossresearch.org/tjiirrs/005d.html
A genuine water cap does not produce hydrogen, it stores energy.
Stans water cap story is more than likely diversion tactic.
***Intrinsic properties of water dont allow for what he goes on about.***
As for the rest of the video , I cant look at it any more. Ill point out again , there is no copy right on the VHS video , I hear people a claiming rights .
When reading the Tech Brief pdf you can type in keywords in Select Tools at the top left and itll take you to hi lited pages, keep tapping Next, in FIND.
eg; MONATOMIC= 0 , DIATOMIC= 0, Alternating current= 0, centre frequency = 0, reactance coil = 0 , Quality = 0, oscillation = 40 x , resonance =8 x ,Ohms = 10 x (only) ,78.54 = 6 x,
78.54ohms = 3 x, attenuate = 11 x , attenuated = 6 x , choke = 40 x.
Search does not include diagrams.
An Attenuator is the opposite of an amplifier, it removes POWER from a signal... yet another way for stan meyer to stick it up replicators , he didnt say replicators are going to bring it in.
A reactance coil has high Xl but low R ,also called a choke coil . (Q= X / R )
Stan wrote " 11.6 K ohm coil " , if thats R measurement like aaron murakami beleived it to be , then it is NOT a reactance coil and if its SS 430 then theres the problem of skin depth and skin effect , especially for AWG 44 as murakami claimed to use.
I couldnt find the waterfuel.100free Qiman/murakami site , it mustve been taken down ,I would guess he would want that to dissapear .
Stan said water becomes an electronic component ,... so how is that component connected?
the plates can be series or parallel but the water is neither , it is a uniform body.
10 years ago I made individual cells so they could be genuine series , parallel configuration without sharing the same body of water.
Testing was also done with/out using HV series cap coupling to add XC and block DC.
The conclusion = water caps do not produce hydrogen
Cells produce hydrogen using DC or diodes
Also water itself has attenuation coefficient which limits the range of radio signals
One day stans Tech Brief will be seen as useful as the Fast Freddy Hydrostar manual and that really is a pile.
Im genuinely shocked how long stans info has hung around without being evaluated by ANYONE , (try and find one)
Its not like its a hard thing to do , its chocka full of mistakes and misinfo.
Stan Meyers is stone cold dead but still has remote control of people. unbelievable
I had a look at climtechsolutions evaluation of Bob Boyce circuit , these guys are Nutech2000 , Ian and co .
I think this is the page .... hes another freddy dud.
http://www.climtechsolutions.com/?page_id=3/bob-boyce/test-results-sept-27-08-for-bob-boyce-cell/page-1
...OK maybe thats not the page I was after...
http://www.climtechsolutions.com/?page_id=3/bob-boyce/the-august-d9-bob-boyce-update-for-the-bob-boyce-team/page-1
http://www.climtechsolutions.com/?page_id=3/bob-boyce/page-1
This is a great example where a genuine team hit a project and shows the money invested , NO different from Stans Tech Brief and the mountains of money people throw at trying to replicate WFC .
**$ 3000 ** and these are guys who know what theyre doing , so imagine someone who has no idea and theyre burning money that they actually need instead of building a door stop.
Ian and his bunch have monthly meetings in Melbourne and are not hobbiest they are genuine researchers.
Stan= "when your tuning into the resonance and when you hit in resonance under this condition ,then the water molecule just falls apart"
NO , it doesnt, the Z machine uses water because it doesnt fall apart under huge stress, single firing , NOT resonance , for a reason.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z_machine
What about the dielectric properties of paraffin= 1.9 -2.5 , mineral oil =2.2 , silicon oil = 2.2 -2.7 , olive oil = 3.11 ,Castor oil =4.7 ,alcohol =16 -31 ,acetone =21.3, methanol =22 ....etc.
All these figures are well below 78.54 @ 25C specific ,so why not lower the bar and aim low .
Any one who can be bothered will find the obvious = NO BREAKDOWN OF DIELECTRIC in an AC resonant circuit.
Water intrinsic properties = permittivity + resistivity , the shunt R does not go away, and Power dissipates in R.
Gating is yet another one of Stans tricks , IF people were honest about it , no one has a genuine reason for why it is at all neccessary other than Stan said so.
*Stans word ? he was definitely an artist.
With all caps , max Ohms is achieved with zero frequency .
1 uf @ 10 khz = 16 ohms,
1 uf @ 1 hz = 159 K ohms
1 uf @ zero freq DC = open circuit = max ohms
* opens circuit without breaking it.
http://www.66pacific.com/calculators/xc_calc.aspx
Z machine and lasers use single shot where max ohms are and max charging current = power.
http://books.google.co.nz/books?id=vn0-Z6cLphgC&pg=PA86&lpg=PA86&dq=blue+laser+water+capacitor&source=bl&ots=DzZqxmmXyZ&sig=Niino6LB6H5whesWkrb9ipcN20I&hl=en&ei=Myk-ToWGMcOHrAfax6ztDw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBYQ6AEwAA
Excimer laser,
note page 87 " just before the water ionizes and loses its insulating properties"
Heading ; Beyond solar cells and IC = "...manipulate chemical reactions with light..."
Stans Denver 1997 video.
DENVER 27:21 = " Creativity comes from God , if its beneficial for mankind and I just simply asked a prayer to God , if you show me a way , I love my country , its the greatest country in the world , Ill do anything you want me to do "
JOB 27:21 = "The east wind carrieth him away , and he departeth: and as a storm hurleth him out of his place.
JOB 27:8 = "For what is the hope of the hypocrite ,though he hath gained , when God taketh away his soul ?"
27:9 = " Will God hear his cry when trouble cometh upon him? "
WHOA ....
Stan did his best to stamp out any creativity in everyone else by selling misinfo and avoiding questions .
http://www.free-energy-info.com/P8.pdf
http://www.free-energy-info.com/MeyerData.pdf
One for the price of 2 , "through the eyes of a Bussinessman" thats $70 US
Nothing stan wrote is useable , FIG 1-1 AA circuit is BOGUS , 8XA circuit is BOGUS.
Eugene Mallove wouldve made mince meat out of Stan if allowed to question Stan in full.
But...then who would listen?
Stans supporters cant actually pin point exactly ,what it is that they support
You really have been on quite a walk-a-bout
for quite a long time now haven't you...
Have you convinced yourself yet ?
Convince myself of?
Can you see what actually unfolded? The facts dont change for anyone.
Have you studied stans info? Did you fall for it?
I first heard of stan in the 90s but like anyone else back then who had any tech knowledge, once the info is read properly and thoroughly, its RUBBISH!
Im not the first to discover that fact, alot of people walked away from stan back then.
IF I started a thread hammering stan , Id be banned at day one. I still havent hammered stan, he had full control of his words, he wrote them.
Minde4000 pushed the button and BINGO! great timing.
nowhere have I doubted stans invention, the thread is about permittivity of water, which is fundamental to a water capacitor.
Water is not a simple subject, there is no "simple stick"**
http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/sitemap.html
A cell is not a capacitor , its funny how stan(WFC) meyers shifted everyones focus to capacitance, theres no mention of cell function in his info or videos .(no cap function either)
Ive done testing in the 90s , a water cap does not produce gas, nor should it, a cell does produce gas and so it should.
No where have I discouraged anyone, I tried to help H2Opower , he did not like that flavour at all.
NOTE; nobody else offered, which says alot ,obviously slipped past the sharpest eyes.(HOW?)
He wants 863.94 ohms for 11 series caps, why 863.94?
863.94 / 11 = 78.54 ohms, that is the crippling effect of stan meyers.
He said it was the dielectric value of water.
Is that a fact in science, chemistry, physics, EE or electronics?
NO , its a meaningless figure and irrelevant.
Im not trying to convince anyone, nor discourage anyone. Whats the benefit?
If anything ,Its a heads up.
Obviously your paying attention, theres a few hits, lets be honest , 88 of those are yours.
Notice I havent ripped anyone down
Collins dictionary
Hypocrite = person guilty of hypocrisy; dissembler , pretender
Hypocrisy = simulation of virtue or goodness; dissimulation, pretence
Dissemble = cloak, disguise , conceal (character , intention, act ), pretend not to see , ignore ,insult etc ; ** fail to mention fact ** ; conceal ones motives etc
Is this accurrate in reference to Stan Meyers ?
Stan lay claim to JOB 38:22 - 23 and presented himself as a spearhead bringing in Gods treasures of the snow in times of trouble and war.
IF so , did he deliver? It was entirely his choice, he had options and he made his choice.
Stan Meyers Tech Brief
7-3; "The established dielectric value of water (85) being 78.54 ohms"
7-4: " a resistive liquid (having an ohmic value of 78.54 ohms)
7-8; "the dielectric property of water (being 78.54 ohms @ 25c )
It cant be too hard to work this one out.
Ohms is a measurement between 2 points.
A resistor has a measurement in Ohms between ....
One end..................................................and................................................the other.
So... 78.54 ohms PER WHAT ? ? ?
Metre ? cm ? mm ? foot ? inch ? linear ? square ? cubic ?
Permittivity is dimensionless , meaning it has no units = NO ohms , NO volts ...etc
Try and measure it and find 78.54 ohms per whatsit.
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/452314/permittivity
http://searchcio-midmarket.techtarget.com/definition/permittivity
Good luck
nothing adds up about meyer untill u realise his patents have been altered
they should have been released into the public domain as most patents are. not his mate, when they finally were did we really expect usefull information?
I have worked out the vic, yes so many have claimed this before. but i can be proved right and thats what counts.
Your not wrong !
** ALL tech patents are altered ,thats how patents are written ,otherwise they would all be called ..PLANS!
eg; the original microwave oven patent is a no go. Why ?
Its a huge market and you dont let that go,... by givin it away. $$$$
No tech manual or science journal qoute patent content simply because its invalid.
http://www.free-energy-info.com/PatE12.pdf
Horvath patent is the best example, its not functional with reversed components + LC etc
its a fore runner to stans 8XA which is hardly interesting, using a SCR (diode).
people change the 8XA in order to just get it operating ,without realising they just proved its a DUD!
At the end of the day its a 555 trigger ,hopefully for a transistor or mosfet.(most cases not)
No one really knows why they absolutely MUST have a 7490 divider ,other than because... stan said so!
http://www.free-energy-info.com/PatE6.pdf
Stephen Meyers ; the order of the day = 2 plates and a curly wire . (very much like Freddy)
As for IRON wire , Ive heard of guys using it thru the years.
Rob Nelson was using it a year or 2 ago.
http://www.rexresearch.com
Legend has it that Stubblefield was using it, I cant see why not, every conductive metal we use is dragged out of the same ground , 2 pole magnetic ball that it is.
I read an article in New scientist a while back about magnetoelectronics, also quantum hall effects.
If your researching that avenue , I say good for you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spintronics
true patents are not plans, yea you can make it hard to read or put the odd duff info in and you can spend money to patent a helicopter that you say can fly to the moon that just wont work. What i am saying is meyers patents are not protecting his work they are not the orginal patents written by meyer, they have been cleverly altered before release so they can never work.
Again.... Your not wrong ,
No patents hold reliable info, it would only contradict their purpose ,they are a legal document only.
Horvath, Puharich and Meyers patents have no workable circuits but people keep referring to them ,year after year which amounts to decades. People interpret them the way they want to.
Yep... Patents are..." cleverly altered before release, so they can never work"
Thats what you pay for, its for territorial market rights and are written by the attorneys office.
Its standard practice for patents to have meaningless diagrams and descriptions .
So if patents arent a reliable source of info and stans authored and compiled booklets are intentionally BOGUS , then what?.
No one wants to even consider that stan would put one past them and that the misinfo could possibly originate from the man himself. Thats supposed to be the bad guys job.
Its not in stans best interest to release relevant info into the consumer market , otherwise it is no longer a viable market if it is self sufficient.
His position of most power is to maintain full control of intellectual property by NOT giving it away to complete strangers.
Stans form of future proofing his investment/invention was to shell out BOGUS info.
Most inventors do that, simply because investors want a secure investment.
Heres the evolution of Dave Lawtons circuit.
http://www.icubenetwork.com/files/watercar/non-commercial/dave/testsetup.gif
The gate has miller capacitance that needs to be dealt to at pin 3.
The 820R is in a funny position which shouldnt be there.
http://tesla3.com/free_websites/wf_meyer_lawton.html
The 820R has been moved to the gate. (...problem discovered)
The source now goes to earth, this would indicate he didnt understand mosfets at the time of the first circuit 2004.
The final circuit uses a 2nd 555 to switch the other 555 on and off at reset pin 4.
pin 2 is the trigger , if anyone wants to improve on that ,most electronic shops have booklets @ $5 or so , that have the same 2x 555 circuit, its basic and can be replaced by a 556.
Gating was suggested by stan but theres no reason given anywhere. Its a good way to knockout resonance if there is any.
In its basic form the circuit is a step up from the 8XA ,simply because it uses a mosfet instead of a SCR and it has no dividers. Dividers for what?
zero f = DC .
Heres Aaron Murakamis attempt 2004- 2007
http://tesla3.com/free_websites/wf_meyer_aaron_qiman13.html
Stans Tech Brief is used as a guide which is open to interpretation in any direction.
(** Y'all have to find the quotes )
Fig 10 - 1 , VIC . Underlined "water dielectric value 78.54 ohms"
IF its been underlined as key info ...........its BOGUS! !
Aaron = "I was surprised to find so many ideas about how the chokes are designed considering the fact that the text descriptions and diagrams in the WFC tech brief are very, very clear"
The actual fact is , the Tech Brief is heavily weighed down with BOGUS info and it will take anyone down with it .
Aaron= "The formulas that Meyer's give in his tech brief are so complex that I still have not completely figured them all out, but I have a good understanding of most of them especially after thoroughly reading the tech brief over and over again."
The formulas are every where , some are AC but NONE are for pulse circuits.
....... . .
CHOKES;
Aaron =" Meyer's states that 11,600 ohms per choke is a typically enough resistance to inhibit the amps. I am think about using 44awg wire to construct the chokes. Since 44awg is 2,593 ohms every 1,000ft (11600/2593=4.473*1000=4473) that would be 4,473ft of wire per choke. Now you might think that is a lot of wire to wind (lol, by hand yes it is.), but if you construct the chokes correctly you should be able to fit it all on, and Meyers states that the more wraps on the chokes the more voltage you will get out of them. Now you don't have to stop at using 44awg wire, you could go smaller but it just get more difficult to work with. Sound like to small of wire huh? But it's not because we just want voltage not amperage. "
4473.5827 x 12 = 53682.993 , x .0254 = 1363.548 metres EACH!
A choke has low DC R but high X.
11600 / 2 pi f = 184 mH @ 10 khz ....IF 11,600 has any relevance.
Industrial chokes have L stamped on them so they can be matched to pf caps in switchboards.
Electronics chokes are colour coded for L not R
Std appliance chokes are measured in L not R
**Fender strat pick up coils, 2.3 H , 5.9 K ohm , 44 awg , N = THOUSANDS! Red and Blue wires indicate Nth and Sth polarity. Theres no tape on them , the reflection is because they are so fine .
NO ONE would attempt to wind a choke from 44 awg...
Murakamis 8XA diagram
An opto switched mosfet is a major step up from stans 8XA in place of SCR
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon-controlled_rectifier
A choke with a wiper arm is mythical other than an air core crystal radio set ,which is normal.
Theres screw slug cores or on a large scale , Ferranti style moving coils.
Fior there to be "tuning" means theres sacred geometry butno one seems to bother to see if stan himself EVER had a choke with a wiper arm.
**Its a Unicorn coil = BOGUS!
Theres a diode which indicates theres no resonance, so again , no reason for a variable L / tuning.
The resonant LC formula = 1 / 2 pi (sq rt LC ) = an AC FORMULA.
Stans fig AA 1-1 and 8XA are BOGUS circuits, the components suggest high current because...they ARE high current components!
Aarons 8XA = 120VAC @ 120 hz fullwave, so the video that once was ,is not the 8XA circuit.
It would indicate that Aarons circuit was never functional IF built like the circuit AS drawn.
# Transcription of Aaron youtube video 'Water Fuel Cell - Gas | Stan Meyer Replication Free Energy', added August 10, 2007: http://youtube.com/watch?v=pSFpBW8_v8o
Powerful Gas from Tap Water
Plastic pasta jar with stainless steel concentric tubes filled with tap water from my kitchen sink.
NO ADDED ELECTROLYTES.
Input power is pulsed 36 Watts (12 Volts at 3 Amps).
Producing enormous amount of powerful 'Brown's Gas' Stanley Meyer style.
Built by Aaron Murakimi
For more info, visit ... http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy
and http://groups.yahoo.com/group/radianth2o
*Theres only one thing that saves it IF referring to the 8XA ....
- crux_wfc (Aaron), Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2007 5:11 pm :
First off it's nice to see so many people taking interest in the wfc now, and actually doing experiments. Sorry for not posting as often as I use to, but it is because of a good reason. I have been concentrating solely on the wfc lately and have realized a lot of very important details about the wfc. Sorry if I miss lead anyone to think that I have fully functioning and tuned wfc, but I do not. I am close, dead close, but still not quite there, yet.
** This is NOT a kick in the nuts to Aaron Murakami , the origin of info is Stan Meyers and that is the reason for the post as many have adopted Stans info as gospel.
aaron m. i think worked out meyers technology a while back, in 2004 he was approached by MIB`S and now is a gate keeper for meyers tech as far as i can work out....we aint gonna get nothin but s**t from him. meyers patents available to us are NOT the original patents.
LOL ......I needed that one, way to start the day off ,Thanx ;D
well one thing for sure is all he has given in 4 years about meyer is s**t
...who knows ya might be right .....
Crux wfc..... same Aaron or another ? .....
either way stans formulas are doing their damage posthumous and being passed on to the unsuspecting/unquestioning .
http://waterfuelcell.org/phpBB2/viewforum.php?f=102
I see the 8XA is being wheeled out again. 1981 to 2011 = 30 YEARS! MANY people have built that variac based circuit with the same results.
Theres a BR (f doubler,rectifier) , a Thyristor (high I ,stud mount rectifier) , a diode (high I rectifier) and a reverse diode across the Thyristor.
Whats a thyristor and whats it doing between 2 diodes?
Whats a diode doing across the SCR ? .......protection from a spike getting thru .....the STUD MOUNT DIODE! !
Theres an 8A BR , into a 35A SCR , into a 35A diode , a 15 - 25W I limiting R into an opto (a 25W GATE! !) into a .4 - 2 H choke x 2 = 4 H series.
http://www.free-energy-info.com/WFCreport.pdf
I.I.T.E.R 1995.
page 22 : The 8XA has no component values only 110 VAC and a 10 A breaker , so who ever added component values needs to slap their name on it and hilite the fact that it bee ALTERED.
..Also page 117 according to stan...VW = 65 mph @ 25mp litre of water (semi metric/imperial trick)
so thats 2.6 litres of water per hour based on stans WORD.
It would be hard to say Stan Meyers was honest based on his videos and memos.
http://www.icubenetwork.com/files/watercar/non-commercial/stanley_meyer/News%20Release.pdf
1996 11A page 10 = 7.4 micro litres per inj cycle to run 50 hp engine
1994 10 page 4 = 18 micro litre per inj cycle @ 65 mph **
**Injector volume = 1/8 dia x 2 cm, column of water per cycle
WFC report page 117 = 65mph @ 25 mp litre of water = 2.6 litre per HOUR
1 litre / .0000074 = 135135.135 inj cycles per litre
2.6 litre / .0000074 = 351351.351 inj cycles per HOUR
351351.351/60 = 5855.8559 inj cycles per MINUTE
1 litre / .000018 = 555555.55 inj cycles per litre
2.6 litre / .000018 = 144444.44 inj cycles per HOUR
144444.44 / 60 = 2407.4074 inj cycles per MINUTE
1 injection cycle corresponds to 1 firing/ power stroke.(4 STROKE)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Beetle
1600 cc ,4 cylinder , 50 hp @ 2200 rpm. (MINUTE)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mole_(unit)
1 litre/18 gm = 55.55 mole
2.6 litre/ 18 gm = 144.44 mole
Stans figures and Legit figures look so much a like, but then dielectric value 78.54 looks just like 78.54 OHMS , it almost looks exact but in reality its BOGUS misinfo.
Eugene Mallove was right to ask stan publicly for "the numbers" , because stan meyers simply did not present ANY relevant material to ANYONE,ANYWHERE at ANY TIME.
People wouldnt even be aware of why or what Mallove was on about, just a disturbance in the back ground.....a nay sayer..
No researchers have any info .
I had a look thru "the book of lies"/ Tech Brief pg 219 TAB 37
VW = 3000rpm, .0074 ml water injection cycle.
So using 3000 rpm as the basis
1 inj cycle correspomds to 1 firing ,@ 2 firings per rev
65 mph @ 25 mpl = 2.6 litres per hour
3000rpm x 60 = 180000 rev per hour
2 firings per rev = 360000 per hour
2.6 litre / 360000 = 7.22 micro litre
Using 7.4 micro litre as a basis
2.6 / .0000074 = 351351.351 inj /firing per hour
351351.351 / 2 = 175675.68 rev per hour
175675.68 / 60 min = 2927.928 rpm
LA to NY = 2462 miles
2462 / 65 = 37.88 hours ,no tinkle*
2462 / 25 miles = 98.48 litre of water
98.48 / 3.79 = 25.98 US gallons **
98.48 / 4.55 = 21.644 IMPERIAL gallons ** (.....only trying to make this work!) (Canadian gallons yea?)
The available info given = 65 mph , 25 mpl , 3000 rpm, 7.4 uL ,"18 ul injection cycle @ 65mph" , "65 mph @ 25 mpL" and 22 gallons from LA to NY.
18 micro litres doe not fit.
Using 18 uL as basis
2.6 / .000018 = 144444.44 inj / firing per hour
144444.44 / 2 = 72222.22 rev per hour
72222.22 / 60 = 1203.7 rpm @ 65 mph ***
SO Some figures work some dont
...Might aswell take a look at H20powers figures...
#1 ;Data given. f= 1830 hz , C = 3.77883 nf , Xc = 23015.04 ohms
* IF ..11 series caps = 253165 ohms (ideal world)**
C total 11 series caps = 343.53 pf
everything checks out.
#2 ; A series Z total of 863.94 ohms . **Calc break down based on Z and f figures.
** All caps being equal ; 863.94 / 11 = 78.54 ohms each
@ 120 hz = (1 / Xc) / (2 pi f ) = C
.0127323 / 753.98224 = 16.886 uf each
C total 11 series = 1.535 uf
@ 1830 hz = ( 1 / Xc ) / (2 pi f ) = C
.0127323 / 11498.229 = 1.10753 uf each
C total 11 series = 100.666 nf
OMG theres a ratio....
253165 / 863.94 = 293:1
1.10733uf / 3.77883 nf = 293:1
100.666 / 343.53 pf = 293:1
**physical dimension = 1:1
The only option is #2 set is 293 times larger.
If dimension of plates and gap is the same throughout , it all falls apart when calculating the C formula C = k A / d . Reverse formula C d / A = k . In this case the variable is k.
A = cm , d = cm , C = farad , k = ratio,constant , Ohms is not a component
The figs of #2 are not compatiable with physical dimension/world. #1 and #2 are not compatiable. 78.54 ohms stuffs everything , it cant be calculated in C formula and if used as Z it will in turn stuff the C formula either way.
** If someone (STAN) dishes out false info , it DOES have a knock on effect sooner , later or repeatedly , that leads to mistakes.
This is NOT discouragement or a kick in the nuts to H2Opower or anyone else.
This was brought to my attention .. THANX.
This is an example , if I were to start a thread ripping into stan meyers , Id be shut down on day one.
It didnt take long for the thread to turn ugly, clearly showing division but at least water dielectric value is being questioned. (2009).
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7004.0
No where have I ripped into stan meyers , or anyone , all I have done is point out the dielectric value of water and by *chance* , how stans info is rubbish and misleading.
I have no control over what stan meyers wrote so theres no manipulation by me.
Most news papers and tech magazines write corrections if a previous article is found to be incorrect.
Heres an example of stan demanding the same from an article about HIM, while HIS own material is laden with misinfo ,false formulas and dare I say it .. LIES!
Cease and desist / notice to retract..
http://www.padrak.com/ine/NEN_4_11_1.html
Funny how its a one way street. I have never seen stans info questioned , which stuns me.
People dont want to see the Tech Brief fall over because then theres nothing, so the safest / ONLY option is to reject anything contrary to the Tech Brief.
What are the goals of this thread? From my observations they are not to aid humanity to get off of oil, coal, & nuclear energy or any other form of energy that can be offered to everyone by a pure monopoly system that keeps humanity enslaved for the rest of its days.
This thread does nothing to attempt to solve any science that will lead the world to using a new source of energy.
The main focus of this thread is looking for how a man would try and hide and/or protect his patents from being stolen so that he could profit from his inventions. The current monetary system makes inventors do this as it is a self defeating system and will not stop hurting humanities chances for advancement until it has killed everyone down to the last man.
I see nothing of value being talked about that would aid anyone to finding energy independence. All I see is someone wanting to be heard and likes to hear himself talk on his quest to show Stanley A. Meyer had flaws as a man. If you where there when Jesus said let the man without sin cast the first stone you more than likely would have bent over picking up a stone and threw it.
Yes, Meyer hid the technology, so that being said we have to figure it out on our own and try to add real science to the work as we go and learn all of this the hard way. That is what I have been doing, but I ask what have you been doing? What is the purpose of this whole tread?
That is what makes you and I different I have a goal to figure out what was done looking through all of the attempts to hide the technology. You have a goal to find an attempt to hid the technology sit back and harp on it as if you have really done something.
Meyer says the technology is simple but from what I have found out about it it is far from simple. But when someone says something is simple that is subjective to the person saying it as if Albert Einstein says calculus is simple you would have a hard time agreeing with him as most of it more than like would fly right over your head, but you are not alone as many would find Albert's statement to be false from their point of view.
Right now I think I have solved just what Meyer had done, but learning how to build it correctly to the science I have figured out is now the new task at hand.
But where does that leave you? Still stuck in this thread going in circles from what I and many others can see all too clearly. The goal of this thread is not that of aiding humanity in it's time of need but to prove a small man with an small mind can be right some of the time about something utterly pointless to the advancement of mankind as a whole.
Hope you do take this personal as that was the intent so you would reflect on just what are your goals in life.
h2opower
H20Power,
You have to understand that these pencil pushers know nothing more then that. They don't understand the pressure Stan was under to fold or even sell out. They take everything written by Stan as the ultimate truth when in fact these guys have to put down bogus stuff in order for the idea to get through.
The Idea did in fact get through and even if Stan was only partially right he is tons more along then this guys futile attempt to thwart his efforts.
You are gonna have to learn to ignore the nay sayers and get on with your own investigation of Stan and his process. His process was not one of numbers. His process was understanding what water is and how it can be converted to hydrogen for use in an engine on the fly.
Get back to what is important and thats the work you have started! Stay the course and discover what Stan did.
jbignes5
Good morning H2Opower,
h20power
Full Member
Posts: 196
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #99 on: April 08, 2009, 10:13:11 PM »But I would like to add to that, for I am a homble man. If anyone finds mistakes in anything I have done show me and I will correct myself for I am not error proof. At first I made a mistake with the energy level of gasoline for I forgot to write the last digit and had 495k J/mol for the energy level of gasoline, someone was nice enough to point out that mistake and I corrected it. And then my numbers made since with what Stanley Meyer was saying when he spoke of stripping 4 or more electrons off of the oxygen atom for it was at the fourth energy level that water for fuel surpassed the energy content of gasoline. That should give everyone an example of what a simple mistake can do, I said I was sorry to the group and corrected my mistake and move on. For it is not our thoughts that define us but our actions that we chose to act on with our thoughts. For if I made any mistakes it won't prevent the Gas Processor from working.
h2opower.
**(Humble is spelt wrong)
This thread SHOULD aid WFC researchers simply to abandone stans info (WHAT?.............never!never!NEVER!)
Ive added real science throughout, the fundamental basis of the Tech Brief is the use of a water capacitor. THAT means ...attention needs to make its way to permittivity of water and capacitor function...the FOUNDATION.
*IF that falls over ,the whole concept is FALSE*
Beleive it or not ,theres a large number of people who have been before you....IM one of them! (where'd all the rest go?)
Ive done series ,parallel,series/parallel,HV and resonance and built george wisemans gas gen, this is over 10 years ago!
Ive seen people copy the 8XA for years ...I cant beleive it........A SCR! ! !
Ive put links for people to learn what a SCR is and what it is NOT capable of doing. (personal choice- not forced)
You acknowledge that stan HID his tech, which is a major step forward , the next step is to accept that he released NO written clues, evidence, test data, circuit diagrams or indication of technology branch . (remember Eugene Mallove?)
It is a widely accepted *assumption* that he used an iso tank circuit resonance and that is simply because that is the circuit he pounded into everyones head continuously.
IF stans info was HIDDEN then what foundation has anybody got to build on? the science of..?
Water dielectric value is NOT 78.54 OHMS , it is 78.54 @25 C specific- thats SCIENCE!
Theres a pic of a PATENT INVOICE = I know about patents , patent lawyers and how the system is run. Is there anyone else who has a realistic view on this site?
No where have I discouraged anyone or given anyone a kick in the guts and Im unlikely to put down your efforts, that is not the kindve guy I am.
How would I benefit? ?
*** NO where have I doubted stan meyers invention but obviously Im portryed as a NAY SAYER- HOW? ?
MY STATEMENT IN RESPONSE ;
1 ; I believe stan meyers invention WORKED***
2; " " john kanzius " "
3 ; " " Henry puharich " '
4; " " stephen horvath " "
5; " " yul brown " "
6; " " steve ryan " "
7; I DO NOT BELIEVE ANY INFO RELEASED BY ANY OF THESE INVENTORS.
Based on experience , training and knowledge.
**It actually makes good bussiness sense NOT to release info. This I accept.
*SO How can I be ANTI stan meyers ?
(remember the part where I said the easiest option is to reject anything contrary to the tech brief)
What can I say to experimenters going in circles with VARIACS ?
Its not in me to kick them while theyre down, all Ive done is post obvious mistakes in stans info , its NOT MY fault he put them there for you.
Its a personal choice to ignore the signs- simple!
Are there any sparkies out there? Im usually on industry based sites, this is the only free energy site Ive ever posted on.
I know full well there is a lack of electrical knowledge on these sites.
...How about that ...jbignes5 is having a crack too ! good on ya
Hi Lads,
I think this is an interesting thread because someone took the time to compile anomalies that are likely to be missed or misunderstood if they dont know the science, I dont.
I have always wondered why so many appear to attempt replication using a main supply for power when I would have thought the goal was to use in a vehicle - thats why I wont replicate the 8xa because I dont see the point of spending a lot of $$$ on a board thats effectively tied to a mains supply.
Sure small single cell boosters may help reduce emmissions and some if any fuel savings, but thats still a long way off from 100% water as fuel, and with the small available spaces in engine bays of a lot of vehicles is very limited i think makes a multiple cell idea limited - and I am not convinced that installation into the boot area (or trunk as yanks call them) to hold the wfc is the solution...
Is the injector the area to focus on?
So what did stan hide in his patents?
Quote from: wfchobby on September 18, 2011, 06:28:48 AM
Hi Lads,
I think this is an interesting thread because someone took the time to compile anomalies that are likely to be missed or misunderstood if they don't know the science, I don't.
I have always wondered why so many appear to attempt replication using a main supply for power when I would have thought the goal was to use in a vehicle - thats why I wont replicate the 8xa because I don't see the point of spending a lot of $$$ on a board thats effectively tied to a mains supply.
Sure small single cell boosters may help reduce emissions and some if any fuel savings, but thats still a long way off from 100% water as fuel, and with the small available spaces in engine bays of a lot of vehicles is very limited i think makes a multiple cell idea limited - and I am not convinced that installation into the boot area (or trunk as yanks call them) to hold the WFC is the solution...
Is the injector the area to focus on?
So what did Stan hide in his patents?
Stanley Meyer hid a lot of information in plan view by making up his own definition of terms and even went further in using those new definitions to make other new definitions. This is perfectly legal in the patent office just as long as they have the definition of terms so that they can read it.
Just one example the term "Amp Leakage" truly means arcing between the plates and if you understand science that describes dielectric failure of the medium. So therefore Amp Leakage = Dielectric Failure. If one is to just takes the words at face value they would end up with a totally different meaning like Lindemann did saying it all was a catastrophic dielectric failure. That bit of misunderstanding took everyone 180 degrees in the wrong direction, as now they all were looking to get the dielectric medium to fail. When if you read the patent and understand what was going on Meyer did everything possible to prevent the dielectric medium from failing so that the medium could be ionized. The reason for ionizing the medium is to get the medium to eject electrons. In the water molecule the electrons are shared and the rule of ionization is the electrons that are furthest away from the nucleus are the first to go. With the water molecules those electrons are responsible for holding the atoms together to form the water molecule once they go so does the molecule.
Now you can read this whole thread and not get any type of good information like that which is why I say it is thread doesn't have anything to aid anyone to finding a replacement for oil, coal, nuclear energy or the rest. Nothing here will help anyone in any way what so ever.
Here is another bit of needful information you will not find in this thread. Why did Meyer add so much resistance to the system with respect to the water for fuel technology? I mean he ran the chokes at resonance which turns them into very large resistors, he talks of using resistance wire, and with the injectors used 430FR wire, but why? The reason is simple water has a very low electrical breakdown voltage so if it is to be ionized a lot of resistance would be needed to cut the short circuit currents in the system so there is no dielectric failure as voltage is built up in the system to the point where water starts to ionize. In the injectors Meyer had an all new problem in that he was now using 20k volts and up. In that space gap even the air would have dielectric failure with the voltages being used. Now you can see why with the injectors he used 430FR wire so that he could cut down the short circuit currents in the system so none the mediums would fail dialectically and would be ionized instead.
This is what adding science to the work of Meyer's does, it gives answers to the questions of just how did Meyer make use of water as a source of fuel. Again I point out to you that you will not find any type of information like this in this thread as it's goal is to just point out where Meyer hid stuff or where he made attempts to protect the technology from being stolen so that he could profit from his work. Good science is good observation, and the author of this thread doesn't observe anything with respect to trying to figure out just how Meyer made use of water as a source of fuel. This single post of mines gives more answers to questions than this entire thread does, does it not?
Now with the 8xa circuit you need to understand that it is a Voltage Intensifier Circuit(VIC) and can help you to understand how Meyer did what he did and at a cost of $35 for a board from Tony Woodside it really doesn't cost all that much. Another thing if you cut corners and be cheap with this technology that action alone will result in failure to get the technology working. I see it all the time people building single tube ER arrays when the word "Array" means more than one. Using one tube fully immersed in water will result in too great of a load being placed on the VIC transformer for the wire sizes Meyer talks about using in the patent.
I rest my case.
h2opower
Here we go again...
So on your thread you were waiting for a challenge before i even knew you existed ,so basically YOUR AFTER ME! I was actually asked onto this site to help someone.
Obviously your NOT too humble and you didnt really want anyone to point to your mistakes.
**Can I correct you yet again?
Water has a VERY HIGH electrical breakdown voltage. Vbd stands for breakdown voltage
Vbd = Eds.d
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:_PF_6w5tz30J:www.waterfuelconverters.com/SandiaNationalLabsData.html+breakdown+voltage+of+water&hl=en&gl=nz&strip=1 **SCIENCE**
Rudenko, Tsvetkov 1964 =50MV metre
Decomposition potential of water = 1.229VDC Pretty much ALL schools have this basic info
http://www.learnonline.com/pdf/Parallax%20Fuel%20Cell%20-%20Decomposition%20of%20Water.pdf **MORE SCIENCE**
*You might want to learn about fluorescents and neons...Whoops ! helping again.
Ive put links up everywhere..simple..Im NOT FORCING anything, Its a personal choice to learn or NOT.
Have you found a replacement for a SCR yet ?
You NEED that before you can replace OIL.
I see you were banned from AAC
@ 2009 you were asking for help and 2 years later your using a phase control device (SCR) on a fullwave circuit...
http://forum.allaboutcircuits.com/showthread.php?t=27203
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon-controlled_rectifier
SCR ..AGAIN! R stands for R E C T I F I E R ! !
Your AAC thread is exactly the same as it is today, Hasnt changed at all.
http://www.ionizationx.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=mob2ttn3gm98c6j9ia39gt3t16&action=register
Wouldnt it make sense to join ionizationx ?
Obviously your still pissed that I corrected you on time constants , SOMEBODY had to. I was trying to help you then as NOW!
* READ about the SCR, the **1981 ** 8XA
is a DUD! Whats a 7490 for? decreasing freqs are the opposite of harmonics and higher energy. Yes really.
We both know you struggle with electronics so why would I rip into ya?
* ther science tally is actually quite high thus far.
Catalytic Carbon is a great way to release H out of H2O and this stuff is not costly. It is used in high end water filters like Calgon's. See this chemist at this like understands this.
http://www.phillipscompany.4t.com/CT.pdf
Painful stuff to watch here!!
--------------
Tony Woodside Feels he has something special happening?
To my untrained eye it would seem impressive,to me untrained ear
his high voltage low amperage claims seem to make sense?
Torana
Have you seen his work?
Chet
Quote from: Torana on September 19, 2011, 05:45:34 AM
Here we go again...
So on your thread you were waiting for a challenge before i even knew you existed ,so basically YOUR AFTER ME! I was actually asked onto this site to help someone.
Obviously your NOT too humble and you didn't really want anyone to point to your mistakes.
**Can I correct you yet again?
Water has a VERY HIGH electrical breakdown voltage. Vbd stands for breakdown voltage
Vbd = Eds.d
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:_PF_6w5tz30J:www.waterfuelconverters.com/SandiaNationalLabsData.html+breakdown+voltage+of+water&hl=en&gl=nz&strip=1 **SCIENCE**
Rudenko, Tsvetkov 1964 =50MV metre
Decomposition potential of water = 1.229VDC Pretty much ALL schools have this basic info
http://www.learnonline.com/pdf/Parallax%20Fuel%20Cell%20-%20Decomposition%20of%20Water.pdf **MORE SCIENCE**
*You might want to learn about fluorescents and neons...Whoops ! helping again.
Ive put links up everywhere..simple..Im NOT FORCING anything, Its a personal choice to learn or NOT.
Have you found a replacement for a SCR yet ?
You NEED that before you can replace OIL.
I see you were banned from AAC
@ 2009 you were asking for help and 2 years later your using a phase control device (SCR) on a full-wave circuit...
http://forum.allaboutcircuits.com/showthread.php?t=27203
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon-controlled_rectifier
SCR ..AGAIN! R stands for R E C T I F I E R ! !
Your AAC thread is exactly the same as it is today, Hasn't changed at all.
http://www.ionizationx.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=mob2ttn3gm98c6j9ia39gt3t16&action=register
Wouldn't it make sense to join ionizationx ?
Obviously your still pissed that I corrected you on time constants , SOMEBODY had to. I was trying to help you then as NOW!
* READ about the SCR, the **1981 ** 8XA
is a DUD! Whats a 7490 for? decreasing freqs are the opposite of harmonics and higher energy. Yes really.
We both know you struggle with electronics so why would I rip into ya?
* their science tally is actually quite high thus far.
There is a big difference between dielectric failure and electrical breakdown where something starts to pass amps. Water will start to conduct and at a very low voltage and that is precisely why it is so hard to develop a corona breakdown in water. Meyer found that the solution to this problem was to add in a lot of resistance. You can see what I am talking about here about corona breakdown and do note the graph of the voltage/current relationship: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_breakdown
So to ionized water is to create a corona breakdown. In order to do that when water will become conductive at the voltages you already mentioned you have to follow the graph in keeping the current low. And the broad definition of electrical breakdown is when something starts to conduct current and water starts to conduct current at those low voltages you looked up for everyone.
Do you see the pattern I have of asking questions and then going about answering those questions? How do you think I got this far with Meyer's work, asking and answering questions, and as Meyer himself put it, you have to ask the right questions ;).
Basically from how I see things one has to be a mechanic and a science buff to solve just what Meyer did. You have to understand the basic rule of fuels and then understand the finite parts. In all fuels there has to be some form of instability. With gasoline the oxygen atoms want the hydrogen atoms more than the carbon atoms do, but oxygen just can't simply reach in and take the hydrogen atoms from the carbon atoms thus the need of a spark or heat ignition source. So now that you have that question in mind let us look again at just what Meyer did from that perspective.
The Gas Processor is a device that creates instability in the oxygen atoms from the incoming air supply so that the unstable oxygen atoms will replace the stable oxygen atoms found in the water molecules and just the same as gasoline it needs a spark to set things in motion. With me so far? In breaking the bonds of the water molecule with the ER arrays Meyer developed a corona discharge so that the water molecules would start to eject electrons, I normally call that ionization of the water molecules. I went over the order in which electrons start to be ejected already but if that wasn't enough for you then simply look into the matter for yourself. Now can you see how this all works?
Building it all correctly is where I am at right now, as the science part is done from the looks of it. Asking and answering questions is how I got to this point and will be how I get the technology up and running.
I was tossed out of ionizationx for not staying on the hho bandwagon from my perspective, tossed out of the circuits form for showing how the gas processor worked, and tossed out of the energetic site for poking holes in their Nitrogen theory far too often. Not many can understand this technology and as a result I have run-ins with them as when they try and throw their non-science views on me I simply toss them back in their face.
I am not mad at you or even mildly pissed off to be honest I am not even here for you but for all the others reading this thread of yours as someone has to lead the way towards some real answers to some of the questions they all might have on the technology. Someone has to show the science in easy to understand ways so they can start to see it too. Having grown tired of seeing people run around in circles by threads such as this I simply decided to do something about it. People want answers to questions and solutions to problems not the run-around. To put it in simple terms we can care less about what lies or the many ways that Meyer said and/or hid the technology from everyone. We want the good science that shows how he did what he did not a side show of entertainment.
PS I ran spell check for you since you seemed to be too heated to do so ;D
h2opower
Hey Ramset,
Painful ? This is Rock n Roll . Cant say Ive seen a Tony woodside , is he next?
Hows the cat ? my cars still grubby ....
Basically from how I see things ,one has to be an electrician and have a patent in order to talk accurrately on the subject.
Notice the 3 phase pf cap, E.I.T manual and patent invoice pics ? .. should be self evident....
Low V = decomposition potential of water = electrolysis
HV + dielectric /Breakdown voltage of water = NOT related to electrolysis
Has science changed over night? ...OR do the facts remain the same?
Like I said ,Im one of the many that have been before you.
*** It is standard practice to analyse available data, if I saw your calcs as wrong ,should I NOT have corrected them ?
Im not using force , its a personal choice for anyone to follow links , that is called EDUCE.
**Your more than welcome to tell ME how components work.
As for the mechanic view, I know my way around cars, Ive got a harley sitting here that I rebuilt from the ground up, so Yea Im with you there too!..... Me keep up.
Is water still measured at 78.54 OHMS or have we made it over that line?
Your latest diagram still has it there , Please explain, is it mechanical? OR can some one else dare ask ?
Its a realisation NOT a kick in the guts.
Hang on ..Heated? where? , when? whatve I done now?
As for spelling I do **NOT** take punches at anyone about their Adult literacy skills, did you see the HUMOUR? y know .... humble..
..someone some where was laughing.
I dont do spell check...take a look, I pride myself on having better things to do.
Ask the right questions:
#1:How much coca cola would coca cola sell if coca cola gave away the coca cola secret?
#2:How much KFC would KFC sell if KFC gave away the KFC secret?
#3:How much WFC's would WFC sell if WFC gave away the WFC secret?
***Well worth thinking about and straight to the guts of it.***
Quote from: Torana on September 20, 2011, 04:47:24 AM
Hang on ..Heated? where? , when? whatever I done now?
As for spelling I do **NOT** take punches at anyone about their Adult literacy skills, did you see the HUMOR? y know .... humble..
..someone some where was laughing.
I don't do spell check...take a look, I pride myself on having better things to do.
Ask the right questions:
#1:How much coca cola would coca cola sell if coca cola gave away the coca cola secret?
#2:How much KFC would KFC sell if KFC gave away the KFC secret?
#3:How much WFC's would WFC sell if WFC gave away the WFC secret?
***Well worth thinking about and straight to the guts of it.***
That was my thoughts of why you didn't use spell check when you repeatedly show times when I didn't use it, you know the old saying treat people like you want to be treated yourself is what applies here.
Now about selling the technology and giving it away as I have done, you will find one can do both. How many people world wide could build these things for themselves? You will find not many would be able to even if they where give a full set of plans. From how I see it with this technology starts the change towards ending the monetary system as once one is energy independent and applies that to ever part of their life what use would the monetary system be?
People now days have been conditioned to take the easy path, even if KFC gave the secret people just don't have to the time to cook it for themselves or are just to lazy to do so, or just don't have the knack for cooking. It is the same with the WFC(ER) the ER is simple to understand but it is not all that simple to build correctly. I take it you have seen the photos of the dune buggies ER and seen the electrical connectors, right? Just the connectors alone will cost someone $220 US if someone just flat out copied what they see and that cost doesn't include the cost springs or shipping just the part that holds the springs as one would need 22 of them. Then there is machining it to get the springs to have the correct tension and have a water tight seal at the same time. Since everything is in water only SS springs will do, again on the costly side. But this is only talking about the ER. What about the much needed Gas Processor(GP)? The cost of the LEDs all have a minimum buy of 100 LEDs each some of the LEDs cost $9.60 each which means one has to spend $960 US to get them. Then one has to design a laser charge pump and let me tell you that is not an easy thing to do as you can't make it as small as a straw for the engine will not like trying to suck air through a straw. Gas speeds have to be calculated for the laser charge pump has a fixed pumping rate once it is tuned up and the variable voltage must come in to compensate for the increases in gas speeds as the engine goes through it's RPM ranges. I write it in a way that lets folks understand the science but building it correctly is something not many can do and or afford to do as it does have a large price tag on it and is complected in it's design.
There was once a video of IronHead showing him with a hand held laser beaming it through some water asking, "What does light do?" That is the level of understanding most of the world has on how to get light to interact with matter it just simply goes over their head. That is a large reason why so many think the GP is just a light show and has no worth in Meyer's technology when the facts show it is the heart of the technology. Even if one is to get an ER up and running correctly it would take far too many LPM to equal the energy content of gasoline which it is being tried by many to be a replacement for gasoline. Again when I talk of energy content most have no idea what I am talking about and how it relates to work being done by the fuel tandem with an internal combustion engine. The oil paid for science guys are all to happy to show people just how much hho would be needed to be made on demand to replace gasoline or diesel as a source of fuel.
I find it hard to believe that I have been kicked out of several forms for saying that the GP is the true source of energy being added to the system and not the ER which the hho band-wagoners insist is the heart of Meyer's system. I have shown just how much energy there is being added to the system even made a graph to illustrate the different energy contents of a few different fuels to put everything in perspective. I guess I could have tried to place in all the common fuels so as to not leave anyones favorite fuel out, but the numbers would not be changed as you have noted in reading some of the post I made in the circuits form. Science has a way of staying the same over long periods of time.
So what does all of this mean? It means even if someone like me comes along and gives the technology away no one will build it for it is far too complex and expensive. The would however buy it premade for them if it has been shown to work. That is where I am at today, trying to build it all for them correctly so all they have to do is buy it and move on with their lives.
Hope that helps to put things into perspective,
h2opower
Torana
Quote
Hey Ramset,
Painful ? This is Rock n Roll . Cant say Ive seen a Tony woodside , is he next?
---------------------
Torana
Quote:
Low V = decomposition potential of water = electrolysis
HV + dielectric /Breakdown voltage of water = NOT related to electrolysis
----------------------
You sound like you go to the same "church" as Tony woodside.
You need to "Look".
I'll get the info together and post a few things here for you to see!
start here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wB8RMbimw0
You'll notice a comment from WaterEnergy1
seems like hegoes to the same Church his movie
Here
http://www.youtube.com/user/THEWATERENERGY1?email=comment_reply_received#p/u/0/c5APczs2G_Y
HHMMMM I just watched the WaterEnergy link I posted
It doesn't seem to have the technical info thats On the Vid they Emailed me
I'll try to figure out why
One thing that sticks in my mind is they say "The Cell needs light" {ambient??}
I'll look thru Manana [Tired now]
@Whats with the Harley pic??
Chet
(?)....... That old saying cant be more than 2 days old ! !
Before anyone drops $1k on LEDs ,there better be home work first. If your talking chemical reaction as in DENTISTRY blue light etc your looking at a big lot of $.
Hi intensities are $10 . std LED are NOT flashers . If there is anything exotic that can do freq then they are specialty items,personally never ventured there.
If you followed the thread Jon singer of joss research knows a fair bit about *light from experience and if anyones covered his site his mate grows his own crystals. these guys know thier stuff and they **DONT**talk free energy but they do talk - what they do know.
The links are there, its freedom of choice .
No where did I say "your wrong" , "thatll never work" or throw down the thermodynamic card.
Illuminati got thru ok , I said " good on ya" - no doubt someone will shoot him down but it aint gonna be me.
I mentioned Fluoros and Neons, Your a mech , youve got a strobe , open it = Xenon , SCR , choke ,dump cap .
Measure R of Xenon = its OPEN .
Fluoro = chokes , 2L semi reso start circuits
Neon = transformers , HV ...,xenon , atmos nobles , zero valence ,lightning , ionization ,gas discharge , open circuit V and Z....
I think youve been attacked too many times and think Im their leader from afar.... NOPE Im not stopping anyone or putting down any ones efforts, the benefit to ME =ZERO.
: intermission (Im guessing)
http://www.educypedia.be/electronics/electronicaopening.htm
Watch some movies during intermision
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wB8RMbimw0
You'll notice a comment from WaterEnergy1
seems like he goes to the same Church
his movie Here
http://www.youtube.com/user/THEWATERENERGY1?email=comment_reply_received#p/u/0/c5APczs2G_Y
He mentions light being important
Don't miss the claims [text] from this one!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsmdSkYEp6M&feature=related
Chet
PS
And the "light" comment
Quote:
THE VOLTAGE INCREASES THE PRODUCTION / LIGHT INCREASES THE REACTION AND BRING THE HHO AT A HIGHER ENERGY LEVEL IN YOUR CELL // PULSING EFFECT YOUR RESONANCE !!! YOU MUSH BE ABLE TO PULS THE CURRENT GOS IN TO YOUR CELL AND HIT RESONANCE...YOU CAN HIT RESONANSE AT A LOW VOLTAGE AND LOW FREQUENCY PLAY WITH IT AND FIND OUT WHAT IS THE BEST FOR YOUR CELL AND PRODUCTION....IF YOU WANT THE LOWER AMP JUST USE TAPWATER ONLY OR RAIN WATER,WHEN YOU HIT RESONANACY YOUR AMP WILL DRAWN
------------
Of Course 2 Liters a second may be of no interest to you??
Let the Pissing Continue............
PPS
Almost forgot ,you can but Tony's circuit on Ebay.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Stanley-Meyer-8XA-Circuit-HHO-Generator-/160607306490
Quote from: ramset on September 21, 2011, 08:09:06 AM
Watch some movies during intermision
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wB8RMbimw0
You'll notice a comment from WaterEnergy1
seems like he goes to the same Church
his movie Here
http://www.youtube.com/user/THEWATERENERGY1?email=comment_reply_received#p/u/0/c5APczs2G_Y
He mentions light being important
Don't miss the claims [text] from this one!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsmdSkYEp6M&feature=related
Chet
PS
And the "light" comment
Quote:
THE VOLTAGE INCREASES THE PRODUCTION / LIGHT INCREASES THE REACTION AND BRING THE HHO AT A HIGHER ENERGY LEVEL IN YOUR CELL // PULSING EFFECT YOUR RESONANCE !!! YOU MUSH BE ABLE TO PULS THE CURRENT GOS IN TO YOUR CELL AND HIT RESONANCE...YOU CAN HIT RESONANSE AT A LOW VOLTAGE AND LOW FREQUENCY PLAY WITH IT AND FIND OUT WHAT IS THE BEST FOR YOUR CELL AND PRODUCTION....IF YOU WANT THE LOWER AMP JUST USE TAPWATER ONLY OR RAIN WATER,WHEN YOU HIT RESONANACY YOUR AMP WILL DRAWN
------------
Of Course 2 Liters a second may be of no interest to you??
Let the Pissing Continue............
PPS
Almost forgot ,you can but Tony's circuit on Ebay.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Stanley-Meyer-8XA-Circuit-HHO-Generator-/160607306490
Whom are you speaking too, Ramset?
h2opower
I.m speaking to The two of you!
I have never heard Torana mention Voltrolysis And I was seeking an opinion on theses recent Movies? I have heard you mention Tony Woodside and his circuit , But nothing conclusive ?
For the members here I would just like to hear your opinions [Torana And Yourself]on these movies? You both have done rediculous amounts of research ,to your credit!
Something very big seems to be happening in these Vids,there is a common thread and I believe it is Tony's Circuit or at the very least Voltrolysis?I was hoping for some comments during your Intermision [the steel cage match]?
Chet
Quote from: ramset on September 21, 2011, 04:41:51 PM
I.m speaking to The two of you!
I have never heard Torana mention Voltrolysis And I was seeking an opinion on theses recent Movies? I have heard you mention Tony Woodside and his circuit , But nothing conclusive ?
For the members here I would just like to hear your opinions [Torana And Yourself]on these movies? You both have done ridiculous amounts of research ,to your credit!
Something very big seems to be happening in these Vids,there is a common thread and I believe it is Tony's Circuit or at the very least Voltrolysis?I was hoping for some comments during your Intermission [the steel cage match]?
Chet
Okay,
My results are similar to his so I really don't have a problem with it, IE, getting far larger bubble evolution than everyone else: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hW78gKn1ZZ0 . With Tony's circuit someone said that it was too expensive to build an 8xa circuit and I simply pointed them out to someplace where they could get the raw board for $35 US plus shipping and put the circuit together themselves.
With me you have to understand it's all about energy content or energy flux density. To run a car on pure hho will take a lot of it far more than 2 Liters a second as that is 30 LPM and to run a car with hho alone takes around 55 LPM and up. But when one adds in the Gas Processor those large gas output requirements simply go away due to increases in energy content that the Gas Processor adds to the system. For the question I had before I figured all of this out was, "How did Stanley Meyer run a 1.6L engine with an hho production rate of 7 LPM?" I knew then that something was far different with his set up than from what I had seen before and at the time no one was asking questions like that and for the most part still aren't asking questions like that.
Where did all the science guys go? Why hasn't before me anyone ever ask a question about energy content and also went on a search to find the missing energy input in Meyer's system? Why hasn't anyone ever compared the energy content of hho to that of gasoline or other fuels until I came along? The author of this thread states that he has been at it for ten plus years but he has never ask questions like this before let alone went on a search to find just where the missing energy content might be being sneaked into the system, but why? But that line of questioning also is to be directed at you. Why, after all these years, have you not ask any questions like these? I mean come on I can't be the only one in the world who ever ask questions like these before, can I?
When I started in on this new line of questioning I found myself totally alone with no ones work to look at for comparison just to see if the ideas where on the right track or just to see if someone else out there had any questions like me. Everyones total focus was on the WFC and some where on the VIC transformer. The Gas Processor was never talked about before I came onto the scene. From the looks of it everyone thought it was just for show and had no real purpose in Meyer's work.
I ask questions about everything, even how a plant breaks down the water molecules and could that relate to what it was Meyer was doing? A lot of the wavelengths I chose are taken from observations of Mother Nature, the Northern Lights. In looking at how a plant breaks the bonds of the water molecules there are no large amounts of current being used, and only very minimal electrical energy is used to break those bonds. I look to mother nature for she always seems to do things in the most efficient manor to get the job of living done.
h2opower
h20
Thanks for the responce
This Claim
Quote:
HEAT / STEAM RESONATOR (ELEMENT) STAN MEYER STYL ....CIRCUIT TEST
90VDC / 1000MA ...AT 1.2 KHz
WE ARE TESTING THIS ELEMENT FOR THE HOME HEATING BOILER.....HEATUP 1LITER WATER FORM 15C TO 90C CELSIUS IN JUST 1 SEC ....THAT IS FASTER THAN A MAGNETRON......ELEMENT IN THIS TEST IS 3XXX 3#INCH....WE US A NEW CIRCUIT FOR THIS TEST
In this Vid by WaterEnergy1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsmdSkYEp6M&feature=related
Raising the temp of 1 liter water 75 degrees in one second ?
According to member Exnihiloest this would take 313kv to do?
If these claims are valid or honest IMO this is more than enough to
change things on this Rock?
Thanks
Chet
Quote from: ramset on September 21, 2011, 06:17:44 PM
h20
Thanks for the response
This Claim
Quote:
HEAT / STEAM RESONATOR (ELEMENT) STAN MEYER STYLE ....CIRCUIT TEST
90VDC / 1000MA ...AT 1.2 KHz
WE ARE TESTING THIS ELEMENT FOR THE HOME HEATING BOILER.....HEATUP 1LITER WATER FORM 15C TO 90C CELSIUS IN JUST 1 SEC ....THAT IS FASTER THAN A MAGNETRON......ELEMENT IN THIS TEST IS 3XXX 3#INCH....WE US A NEW CIRCUIT FOR THIS TEST
In this Vid by WaterEnergy1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsmdSkYEp6M&feature=related
Raising the temp of 1 liter water 75 degrees in one second ?
According to member Exnihiloest this would take 313kv to do?
If these claims are valid or honest IMO this is more than enough to
change things on this Rock?
Thanks
Chet
It's wonderful to see that I am not the only one getting results now as that means the technology is starting to make it out to the people and hopefully in a year or two everything will be running on this technology ;D.
In the video I posted I am using 300 volts and 1330MA at 3.5k Hz. The water looks like it is boiling but the ER maintains a temperature of around 75-85 degrees F. I don't have the surface area they do to get those high gas output numbers but for a mini three cell ER it's not bad. The water in the ER is pure distilled water with no added anything and that simply can not be done or explained using Dr. Faraday's electrolysis method.
It sure is good to finally not be alone :D. I hope they build a Gas Processor and see the gains that device will add to the system.
Peace and long live the Energy Revolution,
h2opower
ramset
1L 15 - 90 degrees 75 in 1 sec Exnihiloest would be correct , KW NOT KV I seriously doubt he said volt . do you think he was joking ? If you want a second oppinion try asking him twice!
who wants H2 when theres steam at that rate?
this is getting rediculous fast
I dont watch youtube antics and youve reminded me why.
NO NOT GOT THE SAME CHURCH
1 ;NOT knocking tonys efforts
2; NOT promoting sales ,I DONT recommend how people spend their MONEY ..
If you push pause + trace the circuit it is as drawn 8XA ***1981*** edition = LED.
Ignoring **losses of variac,12v T, BR ,SCR,D1 ,L1L2, is this an insane amount of gas ? ? ?
Notice the bubbles drop to level of top of the outer pipe?
this was the reason for a DOZEN individual cells (NOT CAPS) so the water was not interconnected.
Ive already written about it.
The water reclaims the bubbles =recombination , they dont want to exit the surface.
100 VDC @ .5 A at the plates ?
DC = zero freq , a cap has max Z at zero freq, so is that 200 ohm MAX ?
A water cap does NOT produce gas ....
Kadora = charge , store , discharge .
Joss research = charge , store ,discharge .
Sandia = charge , store , discharge .
= NO GAS .. quite simple/ OBVIOUS
A cell produces gas = DC zero f , DC pulse , AC rect.
8XA 500mA thru **35A SCR , **35A diode , **8A BR ? (**An IN400x = 1A, IN54xx =3A diode)
Test 1; BR only ,2:BR + 8XA , 3:BR +8XA +L1L2 (done), 4: D1 ONLY , 1/2 wave IF the VARIAC can handle it.
Ive seen this circuit wheeled out for years with the same results....
In most cases a match says alot.
HP the 1st,
1;put the sun dial down and buy a watch, THERE ARE 60 SECONDS IN A MINUTE... this is not spellcheck.
2; who said stan meyers used 7 LPM ? WHO? think about it ..
3;missing energy content based on whos figures ? stan meyers released NO FIGURES
remember Eugene Mallove or should that be erased from the video ?
4: YOUR the first person to get 3500 hz thru a SCR , your power supply is 120 hz
How do you explain that?
I dont think you listen when someone is helping you
****LEARN what a SCR does *** you can do that IF you HELP YOURSELF.
Ive already written about rect mains boiling water -large bubbles.
Your V = 150 - 300 , .8 - 2 A , 138 - 256 OHMS .
300 / 1.33 = 225 ohm I have no idea where your measuring but that is NOT Xc .
Remember the calcs Ive already done ? standard practice.
Does Variac want to blow? Does choke heat? Remember your power supply is the national grid**
**Have you done the calcs **THIS IS YOUR RESPONSILITY as the researcher in order to do that you need to LEARN electronics , you CANT AVOID IT.
This thread is to try and raise awareness of REALITY , its a form of charity.....it seems.
Im now convinced that the 8XA ...WILL.. be wheeled out 10 years from now ....the same old crap.
Hi
what made me curious about the 8xa diagram wass the fact it relies upon an AC supply, unless it was intended to operate from some sort of inverter im not convinced the 8xa diagram was for operational purposes in a vehicle, imho.
So as im not as familiar with the in-depth issues as discussed on this thread - I would like to ask - what then would be a desired circuit design to drive a VIC for a cell set?
another curiosity I have for which I dont have the experience to answer is.....the 8xa circuit diagram, to my mind, shows a sine type wave (unipolar voltage) at 120hz giving the appearance of being gated thru the scr. Other diagrams, and the "lawton" type diagrams show a square wave driving a ...coil of sorts (whether it be the VIC or bifilar coils).
Assuming a design uses a VIC coil:
is there any functional differences in driving a coil with a sine wave or square wave to obtain a desired end result at the WFC??
Quote from: wfchobby on September 22, 2011, 05:46:04 AM
Hi
what made me curious about the 8xa diagram was the fact it relies upon an AC supply, unless it was intended to operate from some sort of inverter I'm not convinced the 8xa diagram was for operational purposes in a vehicle, IMHO.
So as I'm not as familiar with the in-depth issues as discussed on this thread - I would like to ask - what then would be a desired circuit design to drive a VIC for a cell set?
another curiosity I have for which I dint have the experience to answer is.....the 8xa circuit diagram, to my mind, shows a sine type wave (unipolar voltage) at 120hz giving the appearance of being gated thru the scr. Other diagrams, and the "Lawton" type diagrams show a square wave driving a ...coil of sorts (whether it be the VIC or bifilar coils).
Assuming a design uses a VIC coil:
is there any functional differences in driving a coil with a sine wave or square wave to obtain a desired end result at the WFC??
The 8xa circuit is only a starting point to understanding just what Stanley Meyer did, nothing more. You will have to read the International Independent Test-Evaluation to see just what the 8xa circuit was used for. It is a Voltage Intensifier Circuit, Meyer hadn't gotten everything right and made lots of improvements with each design.
Now going from the 8xa circuit to the VIC transformer you can see that the SCR switch, which is limited, was removed from the role of frequency generation.
The square wave is used with DC voltage to produce a magnetic field cut off in the primary coil, but the wave that the secondary makes is a sin wave. I go over the VIC transformer here if you want learn more: http://www.hereticalbuilders.com/showpost.php?p=995&postcount=2
The square waves are just to give it a magnetic field collapse so a voltage is induced to the secondary winding using power from a DC source. From the page I gave you to view you will learn what goes to the WFC(ER) and more.
From what I gather on the 8xa circuit it was meant to demonstrate that Dr. Faraday's method was not the only way to break the bonds of the water molecules. Plus to also show that one could use less power and produce more gas than Dr. Faraday's method said was possible.
Anyway I think I have posted enough in this thread to give people more hope towards winging ourselves off of oil plus the rest of the dirty forms of fuel in use today.
Take care everyone,
h2opower
TAKE CARE OF THIS TOO!....
CHECK LIST ....THINGS TO DO .
1;standard mic oven transformer is EARTHED in a 1/2 wave V doubler VILLARD circuit. *EARTHED!!
2;Your BR is the wrong way around ,its POSITIVE EARTHED!
3;SCR will NEVER turn on simply because BR is the WRONG way around
4;SCR anode is connected to BR ANODE!
5;Opto iso H11D1 is open to MOT voltage
6;diode at point A just past V meter is connected the WRONG way around (why is it there?)
7;Diode across the top of SCR ? why ?
8;Your using a SCR = PROBLEM!
9;12 v transformer is connected to BR which is the WRONG way around ,its POSITIVE EARTHED!
10;Same old problem =7490 dividers again..
11;......3 PHASE FROM WHERE ? ? ? ?
12; ....RESISTANCE OF WATER = 78.54 OHMS ? ? ? ? HOW? ? ?
13; MOT V and I out put ?
14; BR V and I RATING ?
15; REMOVE VILLARD CIRCUIT = 1/2 Voltage out put. HALVED
16; Block diode 1200v 10 A ...MOT V ?
17; **ALL OF ABOVE ..X 3 ******.
18; 7812 V reg for ? ? LUCK?
Youve got explaining to do............NOT TO ME , IM OK THANK YOU .
You need to explain it to the people your influencing, YOUR effectively spending THEIR MONEY by telling them what to do,YOUR WAY .
Stan knew his audience well.
Can you see how people just might benefit from reading this thread ?
Quite some info and it is also *******FAIR WARNING*******
YOU HAVE TO ASK THE RIGHT QUESTIONS .....(theres some goodies too!)
@ ALL,
The Author of these threads will no doubt welcome any questions and feed back
http://www.hereticalbuilders.com/showthread.php?t=174
http://www.open-source-energy.org/?page_id=11 = RWG RESEARCH; some science added to the work of stan meyers.
Its a personal choice for anyone to want an 8XA , NO where have I said " Dont do it", "STOP!"
If you want to donate money , that is also a personal choice.
****I DO NOT DEAL IN OR FIX 8XA CIRCUITS, I HAVE VERY LITTLE INTEREST IN THIS CIRCUIT.**
GOOD LUCK! ! !
Torana
I have to say ..........
In spite of wanting to reach thru the screen sometimes and give you a little "Squeeze" [lately].
Thank You!!
Chet
RE:
Tony Woodside and WaterEnergy1
I hope your wrong ...............
QuoteRE: Table of Tabulation Appendix A
Stanley A. Meyer Appx. A 04
Gasoline vs. "Water as Fuel": 50 hp Internal Combustion Engine (Tab 36)
111 ml/min. gasoline consumption rate (on-road tested) @ 65 mph + 2.5 hydrogen-fuel of
water = 44.4 mil min. water flow rate + 60 sec. =
.740 mI/sec water-fuel consumption rate @ 65 m.p.h.
Water Injection Cycle
3,000 rpm + 60 sec = 50 engine revolutions I see + 2 (Distributor Turn Ratio) = 25 Rotor
revolutions I see x 4 Water-Fuel Injectors = 100 Injection cycle I sec. Therefore,
.740 mil see water-fuel rate + 100 injection cycles I see = .0074
mI or 7.4 J.1l Water Droplet I injection cycle
Voltage Intensifier Circuit
40,000 volts @ 1 ma = 40 watts of applied electrical power
40 watts + 12 volts battery = 3.3 amp/hr. (current) draw capacity
100 amp hr. battery + 3.3 amp/hr. current consumption = 30.3 hr. battery-life without
recharging.
(Tab 37)
(Tab 38)
Hi Torana,
You ask where did I get the 7 LPM correct? I derived it from Meyer's numbers as we don't want it in ml/min. of liquid water we want it in LPM of hho gas at STP correct? All I did was convert the numbers to match the units we all are using, nothing more. You can run the numbers yourself when you get the time or if you want that is for who knows, perhaps I made and error someplace? But that I hope answers your question of where I got the 7 LPM from.
The main point I was trying to make about all of that was that was not enough energy to run the car, so I then went looking for another source of energy being put into the system someplace. That lead me to the Gas Processor for it is there where I found a lot of energy was being added to the system that no one had ever talked about before. For me that find put things into perspective for me for now it did obey the laws of science and it showed to be a very clever way to make use of energy that normally is just thrown away.
The way the Gas Processor works in conjunction with the VIC transformer, Electron Extraction Circuit, and Amp consuming device can be better understood with this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5w0IGuLR3A
As to complete the circuit of the isolated system of the EEC the electrons that got taken away from the oxygen atoms are then redirected to power the amp consuming device. That takes the electrons out of the system so that the oxygen ions remain in an unstable state. From then the reaction between H2O water ultra fine water mist is just the same as oxygen and gasoline in and ultra fine liquid mist as all that was needed for each of the fuels to burn is instability and the Gas Processor with a little help does just that. For then you have unstable oxygen atoms missing electrons reacting with H2O molecules taking the hydrogen atoms away for the normalized oxygen atoms already holding on to the hydrogen atoms. Just like gasoline it needs a spark or heat ignition source to start the reaction. To help the reaction and give more power yield it's a good idea to have some free hydrogen in the atomized water fuel mixture.
Hope that helps some,
See the power just one good question can have?
And on the circuit you copied and pasted it didn't work as planned, so I moved to Tony's circuit and modified it. The objective of the circuit modifications was to get three phase or that is three VIC transformers working out of phase with each other so the voltage never drops to zero.
h2opower
Hi lads,
some thoughts:
1: Thankyou all for an informative thread - I am finding it useful to see an open discussion on the various viewpoints.
2: the 555 timer - although it is an old favourite - is there a xtal based later design chip that would have more accurate frequency control?
3: the 7490 Decade and binary counter - this set of 3 in the 9xb drawing - they give the appearance of a frequency reduction set which relies primarily upon the stability of the 555 - was this done because potentiometer adjustment of the 555 may have been a challenge to do. So is there currently a single chip that CAN and would replace all 4 chips for the purpose of reducing chip count, simplyfying circuit design and board design and increasing accuracy of frequency required? In otherwords what design would eliminate the need to use 555 and 7490?
4: To advance the potential usage of the idea of adjustable frequency generator - can a single chip such as the XR2206 replace the 555 and 7490?
5: To advance even further - I know that by the extensive writing on many forums people like to protect their ideas because other low lifes like to steal designs and present them as their own and such perpertrators should be exposed for such and fair enough.
However perhaps that human action has suffocated the electronics design advancement for the average hobbyist who may not have the educated skills in speed areas to advance beyond the 8xa and 9xa drawings and the associated cost of assembling it. Tony this is not a "go "at you - your study and accomplished circuit design manufacture and assembling leads you into a career field and well done - my thoughts are what could WE help design to take the idea further.
? It is also recognised that others who have already built and experimented with the 8xa type designs say - build it to understand what is going on - ok fair enough - however in these times of austerity I would like to promote the idea that the potential cost is possible to reduce by advancing in u chip usage.
What I dont like about the 8xa drawing design is it shows a reliance upon a distributed mains supply to drive it and for it to function through the SCR to provide a "unipolar waveform voltage"that is switched at a timed interval.
Sure that design means people who are not electronics engineers or educated technicians may need to study electronics to work out what a SCR does blah blah blah however to my mind this makes the design less practical and less flexible in its design to be utilised in a vehicles power supply, thus my thoughts are:
- a circuit design needs to be designed and built with the end result of it being used and mounted to a vehicle or other engine - whether it be a motorbike or portable generator or similar - and can the same circuit board be utilised in driving a WFC set and injectors?
What are your petrol prices at the moment? An article in the press a couple of days ago suggested we will not see petrol prices below the $nz 2 per litre again
After discussions with others - I am certain that the forward progress lies in utilising a microprocessor to provide the 2 basic signal functions : 1 the frequency generated pulse (whether it be sine or square wave) and 2: the interrupt gating, with the option of adding more "phases". What I dont yet know is .....how to do it. With the advancement of processors, surely there can be cost reductions in approaching the wfc/injector frequency/pulse designs to reduce the component cost.?
what are your thoughts?
The circuit of post#139 is from "Open-source-energy" It is dated 8-11-2011...August
The following circuit is from "heretical builders" It is dated 8-5-2011...August
Might close I would say, does 5 come before 11? ...6 days difference!
Notice the polarity of the Bridge rectifier? ? negative earth.
Tony woodside circuit is the same circuit all over AGAIN! ...the ONLY upgrade is an LED!
This circuit is from "heretical builders" It is dated 12-10-2010
Anyone who personally wants to copy, ...you best bet is to ask the Author any questions.
Please NO pm to ME .
http://www.hereticalbuilders.com/showthread.php?t=174&page=4
***NO I CAN NOT GIVE HI RES PICS ...THIS IS NOT MY CIRCUIT...ASK THE AUTHOR.***
***I DO NOT FIX 8XA CIRCUITS. NOR DO I CALL A SCR A TRANSISTOR , MOSFET ...
***I CALL A SCR A THYRISTOR ....BECAUSE THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT IT IS...
***PEOPLE HAVE FREEDOM OF CHOICE HOW THEY SPEND THEIR MONEY
***I DO NOT INFLUENCE HOW PEOPLE SPEND THEIR MONEY
Hi Torana,
Im not fussed about the 8xa circuit except it might give some clues as to the possible waveform and gating signal required to feed a VIC or similar. 8xa for me no go because unless its fed by an inverter it not designed for end use in a working vehicle so therefore its no use building it unless one is keen to spend precious $$$$ for a workbench unit for experimenting that has no further use in practical application on an actual engine.imho of course
Hello H2o my ol friend,
stans fig are for INJECTION , I calc LA to NY by info given , micro litre INJECTION , Rev of crank , Hour , Minute , second , Mile .
****NOTICE.. it does not say Ohio - LA - NY - Ohio .. (Whoops ! ! )
...it IS completely THEORETICAL = ****NON FACTUAL****
I was being GENEROUS by using IMPERIAL GALLONS
65 MPH @ 25 MP,Litre of WATER
2462 miles / 25 miles = 98.48 LITRES of WATER in the TANK
98.48 litres / 4.55 litres = 21.64 IMPERIAL GALLONS
98.48 litres / 3.79 litres = 25.98 US GALLONS
If US gallon is used then stan was a LIER ! !
***IF YOUR proving stans figures were BOGUS then YOUR the stan HATER and IM the STAN FAN ? ?
....NICE TURN AROUND ! !
I was trying to make the fig work without manipulation....It says "22 GALLONS "...NOT US or IMPERIAL..
wfc ...heard of Mr jaycar or Mr Trademe ?
(2nd H inv can be ...re entered down the track ).
Cars have power supplies ...think . I was going to get into that later .
I already linked a stereo
http://www.educypedia.be/electronics/electronicaopening.htm ITS FREE AND ACCURATE !
H2O,
In post #120 you gave the impression ......
*****" Basically from how I see things ..ONE has to be a MECHANIC and a science BUFF"*****
I would say " ONE WOULD HAVE TO BE! "
We both know YOUR NOT A MECHANIC!
That has been a self evident evolution .....Youve hatched!
On your heretical thread you got a circuit by RORY ...of none other than a XENON TIMING LIGHT / STROBE
Guess again...Hes a KIWI from christchurch NZ
Guess yet again ....hes from a forum with ME!
Shes a small world is NZ....little country with a lotta punch!....No kick in the nuts tho.. its all above the belt
Mechanics have a fair knowledge of semicons and AUTO ELECTRICS! !........fault finding , points of measurement
A mechanic wouldve responded to what Ive said in a certain way.....and replied .
Hi Torana,
lol ive been to jaycar and trademe many times.
The fundamental flaw in the 8xa design to my mind is the reliance on the sine wave frequency of the main supply which is switched through the scr.
The way I see it - car ECU are designed to filter out alternator noise and to rely upon their own frequency data signals for their communication and as such any frequency board for a cell/injector should be designed with that as primary focus, not a workshop bench mains power based supply for it seems counter intuitive to think a 120v american based powersupply will give the same result on a power supply in another country using a different mains supply specification.
Quote from: Torana on September 24, 2011, 12:29:05 AM
Hello H2o my ol friend,
stans fig are for INJECTION , I calc LA to NY by info given , micro litre INJECTION , Rev of crank , Hour , Minute , second , Mile .
****NOTICE.. it does not say Ohio - LA - NY - Ohio .. (Whoops ! ! )
...it IS completely THEORETICAL = ****NON FACTUAL****
I was being GENEROUS by using IMPERIAL GALLONS
65 MPH @ 25 MP,Litre of WATER
2462 miles / 25 miles = 98.48 LITRES of WATER in the TANK
98.48 litres / 4.55 litres = 21.64 IMPERIAL GALLONS
98.48 litres / 3.79 litres = 25.98 US GALLONS
If US gallon is used then stan was a LIER ! !
***IF YOUR proving stans figures were BOGUS then YOUR the stan HATER and IM the STAN FAN ? ?
....NICE TURN AROUND ! !
I was trying to make the fig work without manipulation....It says "22 GALLONS "...NOT US or IMPERIAL..
First off we are not friends by a long shot. If I were to meet you...well lets just say it wouldn't be a nice meeting.
My chemistry instructor taught us to keep things in the same units if you want to compare them. I took Meyer's numbers given in the technical brief(TB) from ml/min to L/min going from water to it's components hydrogen and oxygen gas for the given amount of liquid water used per minute Meyer put in the TB. It is written in the TB as 44.4 ml/min of water consumption. From there is where I got my numbers. Since you have ten years at Meyer's work which somehow makes you the overriding authority on the topic you should have read that and done the same since those are not the units we are all working with.
You have ten years of wasted time as you have nothing to show for your work. Ten long years of nothing, no wonder why your all pissed off at Meyer. But it is you who you should be pissed off at for not asking any questions to lead to real answers and for not following the scientific method and not looking to science for the answers.
So I took the 44.4ml of water converted that to grams of hydrogen and oxygen, then converted that to liters of hydrogen and oxygen gas at STP. Simple huh? Then why is it in all the time you been at this you haven't run the numbers like this before? The reason I took these numbers is Meyer put that in writing in the TB.
I then gave, in my last post, a comparison of just how the system works. Why then when I come back to read this thread has no one commented on that? Was the information self evident thus any fool could have figure this out or was it that the information given is of already known information? If that is the case then why hasn't anyone ever talked about Meyer's work like this before? Everyone should understand how a gasoline reaction works to power a car, and I just showed how the Gas Processor changes the atmosphere inside of the engine's intake system to one that is suitable for the combustion of water. But no one reading this thread seems to want that kind of information as all the post afterwards are about nothing worth reading.
Oh the 8xa circuit uses a 60 Hz sin wave....and I don't like it...blah, blah, blah. It was used in the Independent International Test-Evaluation Report to show that the technology was better than Dr. Faraday's method. I think the guy who tried to warn me that writing in this thread was a pure waste of time since no one reading it wants the technology was right. As from looking at the post after my last posting no one cares for the technology who are reading this thread.
prove me wrong then everyone as I truly do see anyone asking questions about the technology and how it works in this thread.
h2opower
OUCH! ! !
Your Tutor should see the tech brief..
Why would I spend 10 years on WFC **AFTER** working out stans info and TB in the 1990s ? ?
Why work against myself? ....Counter productive
Im NOT pissed at stan ..WHY? He never conned me!
I am NOT the over riding authority on stan meyers Theres a mountain of electricians and electronics guys who have found the same thing as I have, its standard practice to analyse available info.
Im giving people a heads up , its a personal choice if people follow the TB info, I think people should have that freedom.
At the start of the thread I said "Im NOT trying to prove anyone wrong"
Im ALSO NOT trying to STOP anyone ...What for? ?
Ive put links to YOUR thread s , and IM the one getting pm on instruction to make it! (?)
THATS YOUR JOB! !
Help me out...Im directing them to YOU! TAKE THEM!
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7030.240
#1;
44.4 ml minute / 7.4 micro litre per SHOT = 6000 shots minute
2 SHOTS per REV
6000 / 2 = 3000 RPM minute
Speed of vehicle 65mph @ 25 mp litre
65 / 25 = 2.6 litre per HOUR (60 minutes)
3000 RPM x 60 = 180 000 Rev per HOUR
2 SHOTS per rev = 360 000 SHOTS per HOUR
2.6 litre / 360 000 SHOTS = 7.22 micro litre****
#2;
2.6 litre / .000 0074 litre = 351 351.35 SHOTS per HOUR
351 351.35 / 2 = 175675.68 Rev per HOUR
175675.68 / 60 min = 2927.928 RPM , ..minute
***KEY WORDS : "22 gallons"***
***3000rpm ,7.4 microlitre, 65mph @ 25 mpL = NOT COMPATIBLE FIG
***2927.928rpm , 7.4 microlitre, 65mph @ 25mpL = COMPATIBLE FIG
Theres a diff of .18 micro litre per SHOT....CLEARLY!
***IT IS NOT MY FAULT STAN MEYERS FIGS ARE TYPICALLY WRONG***
I have written time again "THESE ARE STAN MEYERS WORDS,*** NOT MYN**"
Ive done these calcs back in the 1990s to save money and time.
**I DONT THINK I WOULD SPEND 10 YEARS OF MY LIFE DEDICATED TO STAN MEYERS**
Christ Church NZ??
Small town HUH...............
any of your "BoyZ" in NZ have an opinion on "Davey"?
Gotta Replication [ of sorts] going on Here,
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/8999-peter-daysh-davey-water-heater-query.html#post155015
Thanks
Chet
R,
Oh God .....something was telling me .DONT hit that button.
A BEER CAN?
HERE ..find him OR professor whatsis face....
http://whitepages.co.nz/whitepages/search.ds?newSearch=true&what=P+Davey&where=christchurch&search.x=0&search.y=0
Dallington is on the Avon river, ChCh was hit with major earthquakes for a year , still going on..
Hes been sitting on it for 50 years, if its based on music , thats a small diameter vs 50hz.
This thread has a simple AC test with warning* using water as R heating element.
Mic oven = dielectric heating. Car valve radio vibrator reed operates at 50 - 10 hz, theyre quite small (reverse op)
http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/press-communities/242882/Sax-notes-lead-to-off-beat-boiler
Torana
No stone left unturned....
The man in serbia says it works ,he says he will help with replicating.
?
Giving it a Go !
Chet
PS
I have a question ?Do you believe Faraday can be beat in HHO production?
Could this be Meyers secret:
http://www.google.com/patents/download/13_123_024_METHODS_AND_APPARATUS_TO_CREA.pdf?id=V6XrAQAAEBAJ&output=pdf&sig=ACfU3U2AVZVLOXfDrvLrToOVthI0cuPkWA&source=gbs_overview_r&cad=0
R,
can electrolysis beat electrolysis ? its the same thing.
Faraday coulomb joule avogadro quantities are all mapped out and repeated .
Lesson; repeat= same result again and again
Is there room for improvement ? YES thats how series cells -george wiseman etc step in.
monatomic isnt supposed to happen.
* 1911 = 50 hz......2011 = 50 hz. Some things (shareholders) do NOT want change.
Teslas most far reaching invention = the power bill .
Faraday as a baseline ...Energy in HHO out
To understand that there are better ways to accomplish HHO production?
I suppose that would be the question?
To understand why things are hard to change....well look at history and the Silk worm 100 yrs is nothing ... 5000 yrs??
I feel to exceed Faraday in ANY way will open doors to much bigger discoveries!
Once the worm gets out ,its just a matter of time!!
Thank you
Chet
Master plaster
This Patent is amazing ,the "How its done" part ,the frequencies they're working with ,the whole thing is a very good read!
http://www.google.com/patents/download/13_123_024_METHODS_AND_APPARATUS_TO_CREA.pdf?id=V6XrAQAAEBAJ&output=pdf&sig=ACfU3U2AVZVLOXfDrvLrToOVthI0cuPkWA&source=gbs_overview_r&cad=0
Thank you
I have shared this elsewhere.[with credit to you of course]
Chet
R,
hydro dam exciter circuit = electrical input . Environment / gravity supplies the rest of input, the output is equivalent and profit $
when the dams dry = theres i.p but no o.p. No engineer or physicist can get it operational even tho the gravity is still there...its DRY. ..dead
faraday...avogadro etc are quantities of exchange, thats all
so you want
#1 the same amount of input but more gas out Vs
#2 less amount of input but the same amount of gas out
one option sounds feasible , the other , a stretch. The only window I can see is the environment. Obviously i.p-o.p only applies when it applies.
If people want to focus on DC and 2 plates then of course your going to get predicted outcome and it applies.
Mr. T
Seems to me you are leaving something between the lines?
What do you think would yield a higher efficiency ?
Wheres the beef??
Thanks
Chet
w,
theres a book *-Timer/generator circuits manual- by R Marston *
it covers 555 to xr2206 , LC , xtal ,pLL ,sine , square , triangle ,saw and wave shaping. its a good book too ,read it a few times over the years . its available thru local library thru -inter loan*-...
there IS a charge.
R,
the hydro is a pretty good example , the least amount of i.p = higher eff.
the environment takes up the diff. turbines DONT turn on their own do they?
Mr T
Your knowledge could save people who are not able to help themselves so please tell us what you know.
This may make you think:
http://amazonwatch.org/work/belo-monte-dam
POWER SUPPLIES ONLY** I dont recommend building or buying. Its YOUR MONEY!
Ive built similar in the past.
heres links to PS which are mobile. ALL using push pull. Enough info to get an understanding.
this is origin of on board PS = valve radio in the 40s using vibrator 50 - 100hz centre tap trans
Questions ask =cablehack**
http://cool386.tripod.com/tradio/tradio.htm vib= grey can v5124
kenwood stereo TL494 chip . Questions ask =Risto**
http://elkomak.4t.com/catalog.html
John clarke silicon chip cdi using IR2155
http://www.molla.org/DIY-CDI/SC-DIY-CDI-article-hires.pdf
John clarke silicon chip 2KW inverter DATE NOV 1992 . TL494 chip
http://www.siliconchip.com.au/cms/archiveindex.html
#109 PS and TUTORIAL TL494 chip Questions ask = perry babin**
http://www.bcae1.com
Jaycar info
http://www.jaycar.co.nz/images_uploaded/dcdcconv.pdf
http://www.jaycar.co.nz/primers.asp
open an old computer and no doubt theres TL494,TL594,KA7500,SG3525 these chips have 2 OR 1 output option for 1 or 2 transistors
basically these circs are all the same but diff power rates suited to requirements.
I still use 555 now and then , theres nothing wrong with them.**These circs are for those that want an independent PS.
stephen horvath patent has a push pull circ but drawn its inoperable. this is the correct hook up where the core itself triggers the 3055 base pins=self oscillating transformer.
sec Z is reflected back to pri otherwise itd burn
***IF people sharpen up with electronics they'd be able to look at a circ and make up their mind if it is functional from the get go.
ITS FREE!!
http://www.allaboutcircuits.com
http://www.educypedia.be/electronics/electronicaopening.htm
http://www.edaboard.com
A conductor of cross-sectional area.
http://chestofbooks.com/crafts/scientific-american/sup7/Liquid-Rheostats.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_resistor
http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/liquid+rheostat
International independent test evaluation report 1995
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/WFCreport.pdf
The guts of it...index
5. purpose of content. establish dielectric value of water as being 78.54?
7. ken macneill . cadake ind secrecy order
8. pat bailey/ toby grotz
14. patent signing doc
16. 8XA fig 7 -4
20. fig AA water d value 78.54 OHM
22. 8XA vic *1981 ***NO COMPONENT VALUES**
23. 8XA1 vic AA *1981
24. 9XD V reg *1981
25. 9XB vari pulse gen *1981
26. 10XA rotary pulse *1981
27 . demo cell -9 tube
29 . photos
40. patent processing * 1983
41. Bio lab. Na, K testing
42. research assoc inc
45. rob queen , SS * 1982
48. plexiglass
50. chemist affidavit *1982
60. * GAS fig* only
63. H2O
64. C5H12 Pentane ,NOT natural gas
66. dr T Nagypal
71. electrical induced explosions in water
75. graneau/millet/azevedo * 1986
81. Dublin rea oniell
98 . phanomenon of the FE in nature. huber
102. taco bell
113. griffin
117. stan 65 mph @ 25mpL
129. science explained. metallic/ionic/polar bonds
NO WHERE IS THERE AN INDEPENDENT TEST IN THIS FILE
**Eugene Mallove was right and no one listened. No available test results.
Shame he had his brains bashed out!
http://www.greatdreams.com/mallove.htm
Walter Rosenthal, top test engineer.....No available test results.
Check last few sentences of mag article....No available test results.
http://www.icubenetwork.com/files/watercar/non-commercial/stanley_meyer/Magazine%20Document%20%5bpage%201of2%5d.jpg
http://www.icubenetwork.com/files/watercar/non-commercial/stanley_meyer/Magazine%20Document%20%5bpage%202of2%5d.jpg
A great man once said.....
"Oh the 8XA uses a 60 hz sine wave.......and I dont like it.......blah blah blah.."
SO......Ive just taken a look at **open-source-energy** and Hello......it seems the town folk over there have found problems with the 8XA and the SCR isnt doing the MAGIC* *(its a THYRISTOR)**
RWGresearch...
http://www.open-source-energy.org/?page_id=11
IT appears theyve found what Ive been saying turns out to be TRUTH......yet Im the bad guy(?)
tricky bit is....if Im wrong ,theyre wrong....IF theyre right Im right.....OR theyre becomming Bad guys ? ....Whoops
********Good question= Is this the circuit Tony woodside is selling? ? ? ?******
.......TIME to look at the components....
***It is actually standard practice to READ data sheets BEFORE beginning any project, FIRST**
**AND ITS FREE**
International independent analysis of 8XA control circuit components and Blah Blah...2011
control circ contains 6 chips that need stuff all current to run, 5- 18vdc,dissipation on data sheets.
it should only need 4 x 1N 4007 ,1 x 100 nf, 200v 100uf E cap for smoothing.
***This is a control circ NOT a POWER CIRCUIT.***
the last component in the chain is an opto isolator, that contains an Led and a photo transistor @ 150 mW.**
why use 8A BR?....for an Led
why use 6660uf Ecaps? ...for an Led..
why use 25W 100 ohm wire wound gate R?
SCR needs 80mA at the gate....? ? ?
SCR.
http://www.datasheetarchive.com/C38M-datasheet.html
http://www.datasheetarchive.com/indexdl/Scans-005/Scans-00109818.pdf
HEX.
http://pdf1.alldatasheet.com/datasheet-pdf/view/82662/ETC/7404.html
Divider.
http://pdf1.alldatasheet.com/datasheet-pdf/view/82082/ETC/7490.html
Diode.
http://pdf1.alldatasheet.com/datasheet-pdf/view/249632/VISHAY/1N1188.html
OPTO.
http://pdf1.alldatasheet.com/datasheet-pdf/view/52728/FAIRCHILD/H11D1.html
555 = 40 yesr old chip
http://pdf1.alldatasheet.com/datasheet-pdf/view/161279/TI/NE555.html
http://pdf1.alldatasheet.com/datasheet-pdf/view/28905/TI/TLC555.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/555_timer
#148 post
"A mistake doesnt become an error unless one fails to correct it" -JFK
....
ok, so it appears you are validating your writings about the 8xa board.
Have you got a solution? Have you designed a working circuit and is there any results you have had?
i see you refer to post 148. why? what is your point?
do you have a working solution?
Validate my writtings ? ....its all text book.
post #21. "nowhere have I mentioned my own testing, its open for anyone to test for themselves"
post#95. Patent receipt , No name, no numbers, no date.
** Im under no obligation to open my books**
I am NOT a supporter of *open source* I have not participated ,influenced anyone, suggested or used force anywhere.
I did NOT stomp on kadora or illuminati
I did NOT cross the line and stomp on H2Os base theory .
Re;post #148. I pointed out a mistake =CR constant, the response #241 O.U. "leave for the individual to calculate"(?) Calc ....which way?
This thread has been shaped by other people,I had no intention to last this long, someone else set up this *account* , what a sucker I was!
The one thing people have ignored is WATER itself and how it behaves.
I have no intention of sticking around Im curious how people behave to the truth when its layed out.
It goes both ways, Ive worked with sparkies who have NEVER heard of TESLA(?)
On the farm when I was a kid we had one of these pumps , NO input energy, the environment does it all.
http://lifeboat.co.nz/water-ram-pump
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_ram
So there are windows here and there, but people prefer to fight.
ok fair enough, im not interested in any fighting, but i do appreciate the knowledge brought forward.
"Re;post #148. I pointed out a mistake =CR constant ".
im unclear what CR constant is.....would you kindly illuminate this so i can re-read the entire thread to obtain a clearer view thanks
tau= T= time constants of L/R or CR.
charging + discharging curves of V and I
http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_1/chpt_16/4.html
This is why I have linked electronics sites , all the info is available and its FREE*** to anyone , theres NOTHING stopping people learning.
IF the info WAS STOPPED then every one would be smuggling it out, but if its free its snubbed(? ?)
There seems to be calcs for everything now , chips and all ! I myself should be using them instead of an old casio fx.
eg: http://www.schematica.com/555_Timer_design/555_Timer_Free.htm
I get the impression FE types think it will take away their free thought or the theory will turn them to skeptics. WHY limit their own potential?
A person has to know whats inside the box to be able to think out side it!
Ralph Stranger of BBC radio wrote good books in the 1930s, referred to aether, well worth reading, he was no tin foil hatter.
No doubt the books are on the net somewhere.
so you mention a RC constant and some error somewhere, could you be a bit more specific?
OH NO! ! !
........you ,had to button *that* button.....
Time costant = L/R or CR
ERROR = ( R + Xl + Xc + 78.54 ) times C.
This is completely wrong........*NOT my Fault* , 78.54 is unaccounted for. ? ? R is not added to X
post #241 , may 19 2011
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7030.240
You will have to ask the architect yourself ....post #13
http://www.hereticalbuilders.com/showthread.php?t=227
Good luck! !
okay so theres some formula / calculation error....
Im not versed withthe math nor physics of said processes, would you kindly point us in the right direction of say doing a calculation that also takes into account of the changing values of the ...water...due to temperature and so on...?
Some ? its unworkable , AC formulas dont belong in there.
Water intrinsic properties = permittivity and resistivity, and high polarizability as demonstrated by kadora @ Lv DC , sandia @ MV DC ,excimer laser, Joss research @ KV DC and Mic oven Hf HV AC and 50 hz AC.
http://www.sandia.gov
Sandias National Lab article -"Multi-mega volt switching in water ", points out as the water itself switches from a dielectric to a conductor that trips the main water cap bank.
***SWITCHING MEDIA**, and thats top shelf pure water supply in the channels.
How does water fit into reso freq
f = 1 / 2 pi (sq root L C )
or/and Xc = 1/ 2 pi f C
or/and C = er e0 A / d (KA/d)
or/and V/I = ohms (resistivity,R,X,Z)
If anyone wants to follow that path and track a moving Reso f ,thats none of my bussiness ....by choice.
Water conductance is always ignored when the subject is Resonance.
thankyou.
a link to the Sandia article from google is:
www.sandia.gov/pulsedpower/prog_cap/pub_papers/022611c.pdf
This was sent to me .Thnx. (O.U.R) (....R?)
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=125.0
1; it takes brute force from a prime mover to turn an Alternator , Generator or Faraday gen.
2;Ingress protection rating applies to water around electrical equiptment because water and AC do not go well . High polarizability.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingress_Protection
3;If a stator coil (3) is brought to a closed conducting path, one of its effects is to behave as a shade ring , effecting the core. If its a dead short in normal running ,its a melt down.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaded-pole_motor
4;Water caps do not generate hydrogen gas, its not a function. Thats a function of a cell.
5;Faraday gen = DC , the brute force electrolysis stuff.
Stan meyers captured peoples imagination.
Capture; to take by force ,surprise or skill**
No! i have never built an 8XA and never will.
learn electronics/electrical theory and then youll be able to trace a circuit to see if
its a red herring.
DREAMING = gate f higher than anode f , variac.
Just for laughs wouldnt it be easier to use a store bought 3 ph switchmode pwm chip???
eg; UC3620, UC3622,...
but only if you beleive thats the key
water is a non linear R = NON OHMIC
non linear components eg; transistor, diode , valve etc
electrochemical = NON OHMIC , no current flow until the redox potential is reached.
If anyone changes any part of the 8XA , logically that should indicate 8XA is BOGUS , eg;
"modified" "updated" "new improved" "revised" ...
people with electronics exp **should** know better , the main f is from variac , itll
produce set amount of gas anyway .
H2 sites never show circuit component spec explainations of Horvath,Puharich or Meyers
,it would fall over straight away.
Stan Meyer and puharich did a lot of damage to stifle "replicators" ,its worked every year for 31 yrs!!
Question; How did Stan protect himself from YOU ??? OR..
How would YOU stop people from copying YOU???
**give yourself an Honest answer.
Your the consumer , thats the natural order.
J
1.that things a door stop! that admission wont come any time soon
2.I wont follow those links , Im just not interested in what those guys are doing
3.The formula youve got is for a closed circuit = finito (Finite) radio, TV etc the environment is part of the circuit = open
4.Look at 12 v batt , all components including the casing originate from the ground. earth is sink or source. look at ground to air lightning or volcanic eruptions.
Hydro dam = mass of electron and proton in form of H2O are used to force a turbine under gravity to move electron in Cu.
again all components of the dam and grid are from the ground . solar panels,coal,oil ,uranium , all from the same place.
on the fundamental level...we have nothing , we have to manipulate the environment to get energy.
5. =NO!
6. = DONT KNOW = go ask (not MYN)
youll find him here .....I shouldnt have to say it but.....*something* tells me I DO....
**HE WONT ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS** .
no one associated with meyers is going to say anything ,it takes time for people to wake up (hind sight)and no one of any standing can support the literature , its laughable and full of solid crap.
**try and find an electrician ,electronics tech or uni student to back up any of it.
ANY OF IT!!
http://www.boltontrust.com/about-the-bolton-trust (http://www.boltontrust.com/about-the-bolton-trust)
it makes more sense to ask direct instead..of ME!
http://hereticalbuilders.com/showthread.php?t=227&page=2 (http://hereticalbuilders.com/showthread.php?t=227&page=2)
http://www.truegreensolutions.net (http://www.truegreensolutions.net)
theres mistakes ...
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1025.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy320%2Fh2opower%2F8XA9XBand9XDCorrectedbifilarcoilconnectionplusMOT.png&hash=45af054b5b72aedf73b5fcb916267d2f03abab3e)
good 1 not even the picture works!
the transformer in the pic at heretical is not a variac
http://hereticalbuilders.com/showthread.php?t=227&page=2 (http://hereticalbuilders.com/showthread.php?t=227&page=2)
the 600 v 50A bridge rectifier is around the wrong way
the anodes are connected to the anode of the SCR , therefore reverse bias = OFF
the 100v 5A bridge rectifier is around the wrong way
the anodes are connected to 7805 + 7812 regulators inputs = wrong
its easy enough to find answers .
http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_6/chpt_5/5.html (http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_6/chpt_5/5.html)
when componenents are placed backwards in a diagram its a clear indication of the lack of knowledge .
heres symbol of variac
Quote from: Torana on August 07, 2011, 03:01:06 AM
Nothing stan wrote is useable , FIG 1-1 AA circuit is BOGUS , 8XA circuit is BOGUS.
Then why have people successfully replicated the 8XA circuit such as youtube users TonyWoodside and Irondmax?
The 8xa and 9xb circuits have been shown on youtube to produce lots of hydrogen using Distilled water and tap water.
Stan may have not fully understood what was going on, but he experimented rather that used pure theory. Physicists that use pure theory without any experimentation are not scientists - they are mathematicians. That's why string theory is not science because it has no evidence to support its claims. Only when string theory is supported by experimental evidence, will it become science.
The question is whether Stan's devices produce excess energy. The devices he created may in fact just be a more efficient way of producing hydrogen, not over unity.
The simple test to do, is to compare his steam resonator to a Walmart kettle. A kettle is 99 percent efficient since the heater in a kettle transfers all heat to the water, so the steam resonator MUST be better than a kettle if it is of any use. Developing a steam resonator that is no more efficient than a walmart kettle is either delusion because you think Jesus is with you and helping you, or it's intentional fraud.
I don't see why someone would waste their time inventing a steam resonator if kettle's at walmart for cheap are already 99 percent efficient.... Someone can EASILY test the steam resonator to see how fast it boils water, using a thermometer, stop watch, and 1 litre of water. Simple test to prove Stan was on to something novel.
Quote from: wfchobby on September 18, 2011, 06:28:48 AM
I have always wondered why so many appear to attempt replication using a main supply for power when I would have thought the goal was to use in a vehicle - thats why I wont replicate the 8xa because I dont see the point of spending a lot of $$$ on a board thats effectively tied to a mains supply.
The point of using household power supply is to get a 120V generator running on hydrogen instead of gasoline, and also to get home heating systems working based on the steam resonator. This technology is not just for cars, it is for households too.
Anyone who tries to get a car running on hydrogen is wasting their time. Small 1HP or 2HP generators are much easier to get running. A car is very heavy and is very costly if it fails. A 2HP generator is $200 or less (4 stroke) and is much easier to experiment with, and easier to get running than a car or truck.
Get rid of your ego problems first; get a generator running first - not a truck or car!
What kind of moron would try and get a 3500 pound vehicle running on hydrogen, when you can get an electrical generator for $200 at harbor freight or your nearest hardware store? Not only can you get a generator running on hydrogen, you can get many of them running so that if one fails you have many backups. IF your dune buggy fails, you're screwed! you only have one dune buggy. Having more than one dune buggy is costly and time consuming. Cars are complex. Generators are not complex. Stop wasting your time getting cars to run, do it in baby steps - the generator comes first!
The amount of idiots involved in Stan Meyer replication astounds me.
If you cannot get a 2HP generator running on hydrogen, then it is NOT worth spending time on a 3500 pound volkswagon car. You're wasting your time.
A 2HP generator produces electricity and it only does that. A car does a thousand things. You don't need a thousand things, all you need is electricity. A generator is much more efficient than a car. Forget cars and trucks, just get a damn generator working. Generators can produce 120V and 12V electricity for the cell to run in a closed loop. If a generator doesn't run in a closed loop, then stan's device is not over unity, and it is not extracting energy from another source - it's just 80 percent efficiency or 60 percent, or 90 percent.
Quote from: Torana on September 01, 2011, 09:23:30 PM
A choke with a wiper arm is mythical other than an air core crystal radio set ,which is normal.
Theres screw slug cores or on a large scale , Ferranti style moving coils.
**Its a Unicorn coil = BOGUS!
You think a variable inductor is bogus? Really?
Quote from wikipedia:
"A variable inductor can be constructed by making one of the terminals of the device a sliding spring contact that can move along the surface of the coil, increasing or decreasing the number of turns of the coil included in the circuit. An alternative construction method is to use a moveable magnetic core, which can be slid in or out of the coil. Moving the core farther into the coil increases the permeability, increasing the inductance. Many inductors used in radio applications (usually less than 100 MHz) use adjustable cores in order to tune such inductors to their desired value, since manufacturing processes have certain tolerances (inaccuracy). "
Good one! the jimmy choo overunity hand bag forum.
1 ; Define successful ; ...its normal to produce gas with DC.
8XA circuit is 30 years old , read the date on it. thats before youtube or ou.com
1981 people have been copying that crap.
If a walmart kettle is 99% eff then what is a water R eff ?
post #25 = read it!
Stans "circuits" are for entertainment value only. No one is rushing to replicate Puharich , his circuit is unreleased. No one is claiming replication of Horvath , Ive linked his "circuit " + components on this thread. I also pointed out components are backwards, short and inoperable.
This is std practice for patent office drafting = the actual people who bring you Patents
Ive pointed out SCR is a thyristor = AC phase controller...it still doesnt hit home, not even as it is an AC device.
Do people beleive stan left a circuit for them ? YES!!!
the Truth and Fact cant even open their minds, therefore their free thinking is limited by their imagination.
NO where have I tried to discourage anyone or put down any ones efforts, its a personal choice. Ive put links everywhere so people can sharpen up.
2: when did I say " a variable L is BOGUS" ???
sep 2 2011 = everything I wrote falls in line with the wikipedia quote.
Have replicators used a slide coil with HV??
Does HV arc between 2 close proximity conductors ?
Read further in the thread =post #122 and quote 1st sentence, sep 20 2011....carefully!
post #4 I used one word that I knew would trigger the inner Teacher Gene = "STUDENT"
sure enough it do!
Whoops! 1981 = 31 years ago . quite a few people have walked that path before the internet generation.
Your calling everyone to work on motor gen sets , wouldnt it be more constructive if you yourself stepped up ?
some practical experience under your belt will either push you forward or stop you in your tracks
George Wisemans welder info has been available for 20 years.
**anyone who has worked with gas will know that the ign advance needs*reworking* ,not in theory but in Practice!...it means getting hands dirty.....and it takes mathematics too!
Briggs and Stratton manuals are in libraries all over the world = a good place to start if you are at the starting line
good luck motivating yourself.
Quote from: Torana on June 02, 2012, 09:45:32 PM
Stans "circuits" are for entertainment value only.
Please look up Tony Woodside and Gary Woodside and Irondmax on youtube who have successfully replicated the distilled water and tap water cells which break apart water with the 9XB and 8XA circuits.
Irondmax is not dishonest he has videos pouring actual walmart distilled water into his cell. Look up irondmax videos please.
He also has videos of the steam resonator working.
I'm not disputing whether Stan's devices worked, they definitely functioned.
However I am disputing whether Stan's devices took energy from "Radiant energy" or "kinetic molecular energy".
If stan's devices work, which they do, that is still not evidence that they are over unity, nor is it evidence that they are taking energy from the Sun, which was what Stan claimed in his later lectures.
Most idiots on youtube have not built any of the circuits and are just building cells and pipes instead of focusing on the circuits. IronDmax and Tony/Gary Woodside have built the circuits and coils and they match up exactly similar to Stan's actual devices in his estate. You do realize that his estate has been closely photographed and Tony Woodside has videos of Stan's actual cell functioning at the estate? You do realize that someone visited Stan's estate and actually tried the cell independently recently, which Tony/Gary Woodside has videos of? You do realize that the water fuel cell was actually tested recently, the original Stan Meyer cell built by stan himself?
Have a look at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txjRpXe8JwA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tGmrPggs7w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xq4WDb3iPvg
Quote from: Torana on June 02, 2012, 09:45:32 PM
If a walmart kettle is 99% eff then what is a water R eff ?
What the hell is a water R eff? Water resistor efficiency?
The steam resonator is similar to a microwave but instead of using microwaves Stan vibrates the molecules. It's not the same as a kettle resistor. It's just a different way of heating water. Microwaves heat water differently and we still find microwaves useful, don't we?
Do you consider microwaves to be water resistors? It's a different way of heating water.
Whether it is more efficient than a microwave is another question all together.
Quote from: Torana on June 03, 2012, 10:18:41 PM
Your calling everyone to work on motor gen sets , wouldnt it be more constructive if you yourself stepped up ?
I've already ordered 9XB circuits and all the electronic parts to build them and I have access to a 2HP generator, that if I get running I will apply for the 1 million dollar cheque from James Randi who says you cannot make Stan Meyer's device work. I have only had difficulty ordering the Diodes but they are available, just costly compared to the other 99 cent parts.
I'm fully willing to accept that Stan was simply producing hydrogen efficiently at say 70 percent or 80 percent efficiency and therefore it is not pulling energy from some special source.
However he may have been using Brownian motion to bop the electron around or he may have been taking mass away from the water molecule, or even producing cold fusion, it is unlikely. He may have died from breathing in toxic gases from his EPG rather than the conspiracy that he was killed off and shot in the head.
Quote from: Torana on June 02, 2012, 09:52:57 PM
2: when did I say " a variable L is BOGUS" ???
You said it was a "unicorn coil, bogus."
You are on a smear campaign, your goal is to ridicule Stan. Look up "smear campaign" on wikipedia.
Please don't ridicule his electronics because we have photographs of his electronics and they match up exactly to his patents basically. look up the gary woodside and tony woodside stan meyer estate photographs.
In fact at Stan's estate they found the coils and his latest coil was a fixed one because he was done testing the variables. Once you find the perfect coil setup you no longer need a variable coil. well you still may need one to make adjustments in the future.. but it is not a unicorn coil and it is not bogus.
There was a space found between the horse shoe ferrite cores, look up RWG research on youtube who has some info, and also Irondmax has the horse shoe cores.
I don't believe you need to spend the money on perfectly shaped cores I think the product can function using other style cores. Irondmax is selling them for quite a costly price because they are custom manufactured.
In EE and electronics "R" is universally = Resistance
post #25, I have to assume you havent read it ... there is no element!
A water R is old technology = Ive linked info in this thread
A water cap is '' " " = " " "
Sandia use the largest water caps = " " "
google effeciency of electric jugs or boiling water
Ive already seen T woodside , JL Naudin etc videos = nothing out of the ordinary. Woodside added an LED!. 8XA has been copied exactly for decades.
No where have I said SM ACTUAL devices did not work.
No where do I mention radiant enrgy, prana or over unity.
Most replicators have no previous EE or electronics experience or theory, if there were then SM info would be questioned and the circuits would need serious explaining.
any electronics mag has in depth circuit explanations and diagrams FAR more technical than the accepted 8XA etc
has anyone done a tech breakdown of Stans info,circ or patents??
not forgetting its been 31 yrs and hes been dead 14 of those.
has anyone done a tech break down of Puharich?......or Horvath??
the Horvath patent is the most detailed H patent there is......its also a pile of crap!! but if a person doesnt know that, then they are open to it.
I know full well SM followers are genuine in their efforts but to hammer away without considering if the info is a red herring or not , is crazy, bordering on RANDOM.
IF...it were disinfo , how well has it worked the past 14 yrs?
lets say its 1998 ,stans alive ... how well has it kept people off the track?? 81 to 98 =17yr! combined total = 31 yrs!
No diff from Puharich,Horvath,hendershot,sweet,moray etc....
most claim SM was murdered, if so, why?....... because he had a car running on water.....
ok, why kill him and not the invention/circuit??
most SM sites or threads take liberties and say.."this is what stan meant by..." "this is what stan was trying to tell us...." "stan didnt have the words to describe..."
And then theres definition of terms which gives people complete creative licience to spin what ever they want.
Peter lindemann is an example, I dare not mention any replicators , they seem to take it very personal..... been there before.
I personally have never met stan meyers, I have only quoted what he himself wrote or said on tape.
From what Ive seen , SM followers are totally shut off or shut down to anything that is not written in the WFC tech brief.
I consider microwaves= microwaves! ...and water = water!
is water the same in the diff heating examples ??
Is water the same in Puharich or Horvath cells?
its easy how those 2 are shut out of the very same subject.
I had a look at the photos = so what?
I also saw theres "new" news letters! GOD knows I dont want those sent to me.
Ive already been told to tune in to RWG = post # 188.
post #189 = Bolton trust = Rea Oneill , according to stan (and therefore his followers) a worthy interpretation in the WFC report pdf.
**at all .... ask him, not ME!!
*****Unicorn coil = FIG 1-1 VIC (AA), FIG 1-14 EEC (BB)*****
how many layers does a variable slide coil have?? ?
If more than 1 then it is a tapped coil - NOT a wiper
a slug core is NOT a wiper
a moving core is NOT a wiper
a Ferranti coil is NOT a wiper
a smear campaign ?? based on what ?? we bot know you havent read this thread, there fore you mind was mad up before you walked in the door when you refer to "WE".
everything is text book, its all the bits the SM crowd have missed, none want to acknowledge theres a VW load of mistakes and lies in the tech brief... it NOT MY FAULT!!
stan wrote them himself.
has any body figured out what "BUM RATE" is referring to?? is that a Navy term ? or is isolated to Ohio? I dont know but No one on this planet has seemed to mention that 1.
why is that ?
does that mean stan started the smear campaign or does that mean anyone who points out mistakes is a heretic or on a smear campaign.
seems like a orchestrated divide and rule tactic set up by the man himself.
Do I have to apoligise to all those who have NO electrical knowledge or theory? its their responsibility to gain knowledge on the subject
its getting to sound alot like a religion
Can you think of a SM site that acknowledges ALL of the mistakes in the info??
do you yourself acknowledge those mistakes?
If so , then... this thread falls in line with those SM followers who dare face the facts.
what the formula for Naphthalene by the way??......(quick off to the tech brief, last section)
canufi="photos of his electronics and they match up exactly to his patents"
does the patent legitimise the circuit photos or vice versa?
does that apply to ALL patents? would a photo legitimise the Horvath patent? or Puharich patent?
canufi = " If stans device actually works as described in his patents there is no need for trial and error since the trial and error had already been done by some one else"
"some one else " = there goes the responsibility bit I mentioned.
Is James Randi (whoever he is) going to write out a cheque to T woodside,G woodside, Irondmax, canufi, H2Opower or should it be made out to Stephen Meyers??
So if the arabs offered stan 1 BIllion ,why would they LEAVE a working unit in the hands of DON for peanuts??
If you owe $100 to inland revenue , they will hunt you down and skin you
If you owe the Hells angels $100....your a statistic
Here in NZ , a guy got beaten to death over a PIZZA!!
...So is the energy industry and its share holders going to leave a stone unturned??
Go ask Warren Buffet, hes the guy over there in the suit , wondering where his next dollars gonna come from.
Quote from: Torana on June 12, 2012, 03:48:41 AM
a smear campaign ?? based on what ??
You've lied several times in this thread. You are coming up with all kinds of conspiracies and spreading lies about how Stan's circuits are all bogus.
Stan's wire gauges have mistakes in them since he mixed up BWG with AWG, look up those figures and you will see what he calls AWG matches up with BWG. Humans make mistakes like this, Stan made too many of them.
But as for his circuits, the ones at the Estate look exactly like the ones in his patents. You claim Stan was filling his circuits up with lies - then why is it that the Estate has the circuits match up exactly to the patents?
You claim that it is all "text book". That's not true. Physicists and scientists do not use Stan's method of water breakdown, they use something called salts or electrolytes, you idiot. If it was true Stan was "Text book" electrolysis then why is it that IrondMax used Distilled water, with no electrolytes? And was still able to break down the water? why is it that Stan's estate also can use distilled water?
If that's the case then Stan's estate should show us that his circuits do not match up to his patents. We should find at his estate that the circuits have been modified to be completely different than what the patents show.
This is not the case. Tony and Gary Woodside have photographs showing that the circuits and the cells are exactly as he described in the patents.
BUM RATE is a microfishe or photocopying error, it is BURN rate. burn rate can be converted to BUM in optical character recognition errors.
Stop whining and complaining like a little 3 year old girl. you're an idiot.
If you don't know who James Randi is, you're really mentally retarded. Look him up, you fool.
Mighty powerful words there pard'ner :-*
canufi "his latest coil uses a fixed 1 because he was done testing the variables.
Once you find the perfect set up you no longer need a variable coil"
The symbol used in FIG1-1VIC has an arrow slide onto the L .
A variable L has an international symbol of an arrow across an L...BIG difference.
Ive linked plenty of info to find it, TRY it!
A variable coil tuned to a f then made NON variable **negates variable L in FIG 1-1 VIC, thus rendering it = UNICORN COIL!! oopps!
1981 to 1998 = 17 yrs
Why was there no correction to his propaganda ( use dictionary)
understandably he cant change IT now ...BUT IT was fully within his power to change IT before 1998! DID HE??
what does the prototype Vari L look like BEFORE arriving at the final "Tuned" NON adjustable fixed L??
Is it single layer with a wiper arm? if so it MUST be very, VERY LONG!!
SM crowd choose to adhere to 11.6 K as a bench mark...not at all knowing why.
Did SM use a wiper arm? Does ANYONE use a wiper arm??
** Th e use of a wipoer arm requires that insulation be removed from **each adjacent turn of wire . Are there ANY examples ?? ..Take a photo!
Anyone familiar with Xtal radios knows exactly what one is. Those that dont.....Dont!!
I already linked wire gauges ...Have you read this thread??
be specific...where did I lie?? conspiracy = I have put dictionary definition, very fitting too.
No where have I said Stan Meyers info is "textbook" clearly I have linked to info , it is personal choice to learn and evaluate his "info".
What I have written is text book and theres a good reason for that , YOU missed it!
Any one can break down distilled water - try it- Ive already written about- Have you read this thread??
I HAD to google James Randi... am I supposed to know who magicians are?? He might be famous in someones world but not myn
Figured out the formula for Naphthalene yet?
Have you actually read SM info yourself or just skim and skip the top??
use the pdf search tool! VERY easy to do
Tell you what, why dont you go to ionizationx, RWG and T woodside and ask them if they have the "numbers" Eugene Mallove was asking from stan for.
while your there tell **THEM** " humans make mistakes like this , stan made too many of them"
heres links right here , dare to step up , why not go with the flow? ask away
http://www.ionizationx.com/index.php (http://www.ionizationx.com/index.php)
http://www.open-source-energy.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=4 (http://www.open-source-energy.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
Are YOU armed with enough evidence to back up that statement and differentiate what those mistakes actually were? while being specific at the same time.
Arent they the ones who NEED to know what info you pocess?
"BUM Rate" is written with 3 capitals ....its rivetting stuff! have you actually read the WFC tech Brief?
BURN rate has 4 capitals ....use the pdf search tool , aint no mistake.
Where have I been "whinning and complaining"?? be specific
what have I got to complain about and who to??
thats the 2nd time youve said it followed up with zip!
we both know you havent read this thread ....IT ...is text book info and theres a reason for that.
I have quoted SM word for word , no where have I ripped into SM, try and find an example.
because I have no praise for him it must be stan bashing?
why is it intolerable for SM devotees to see this info on display?
It is complete freedom of choice , Ive put links every where...just have to move the mouse!
why has no one put a thread to up to back up SM tech brief to the fullest?
Have you heard of Eugene Mallove or Walter Rosenthal? essential figures and both dead!
James Randi, Penn and Teller or David Copperfield are irrelevent...hardly subject matter!
****What user name are you going by in ionizationx or RWG ?? Im interested how well your going to go down. I personally cant wait till your 9XB turns up.
All the best , Pard'ner!
Quote from: Torana on June 14, 2012, 02:36:59 AM
Tell you what, why dont you go to ionizationx, RWG and T woodside and ask them if they have the "numbers" Eugene Mallove was asking from stan for.
I don't participate in those forums because they are full of buffoons including "h2opower" who is a racist american that thinks canadians are stupid, and that americans are smart. In fact quite the opposite: the southern jesus loving rednecks in the U.S.A. are stupid.
Quote from: Torana on June 14, 2012, 02:36:59 AM
Are YOU armed with enough evidence to back up that statement and differentiate what those mistakes actually were?
Look up the BWG system, Stan was using BWG instead of AWG and mixing and matching numbers where he shouldn't have.
I already told you to look at BWG but you just ignored it and kept rambling on about how you've provided the wire information. What you didn't realize was that there is a direct correlation to BWG figures with Stan's mistakes saying it was AWG.
Even if the guages of wires is off by a bit, this doesn't mean the fuel cell won't work, it would just be a different coil producing a different behavior.
The system can be scaled down to smaller wires or scaled up to big wires.
Quote from: Torana on June 14, 2012, 02:55:44 AM
we both know you havent read this thread ....IT ...is text book info and theres a reason for that.
Obviously you aren't familiar with BWG text books (british wiring gauge) and SWG which humans can make mistakes about mixing and matching american gauge with british gauge.
I guess you just aren't smart enough to look at a Bwg gauge and compare it to AWG to see that Stan made simple mistakes. Yes he shouldn't have made the mistakes but at least they are obvious enough to solve.
It doesn't matter about the exact gauge of wire you use any way. It can be slightly different and still work.
You are smearing Stan because he made plenty of mistakes which is equivalent to criticizing a German for not knowing perfect English and using "vill" instead of "will". Yes, it is annoying when humans make stupid mistakes. you make them too. Fool.
Quote from: Torana on June 14, 2012, 02:55:44 AM
****What user name are you going by in ionizationx or RWG ?? Im interested how well your going to go down. I personally cant wait till your 9XB turns up.
I don't participate in censored paranoid forums like that full of retards who think open source research should allow them free parts while people like myself pay for the parts with my hard earned money. As an open source software contributor, I know open source to be mostly a scam. Mozilla Firefox developers for example are paid by companies, and it's not free software - it's subsidized communist software. I'm not a fan of Richard Stallman and free software, and equally am not a fan of Free Open Source stan meyer groups who think parts should be donated to them for free. When these morons go to the grocery store they pay money for their groceries, but they expect electronics components to be free.
Quote from: Torana on June 14, 2012, 02:55:44 AM
Have you heard of Eugene Mallove or Walter Rosenthal? essential figures and both dead!
I know about Eugene Mallove because I started researching Stan many years ago and have listened to all his material.
Stan was paranoid to let people like him see the information since Stan likely had Paranoid Schizophrenia and thought everyone was trying to steal his device from him.
Quote from: Torana on June 14, 2012, 02:55:44 AM
James Randi, Penn and Teller or David Copperfield are irrelevent...hardly subject matter!
irrelevent? what are you smoking? are you on pot?
You realize you spelled another word wrong, you fool - it's spelled "irrelevant". So please stop making fun of Stan for his mistakes since you've been exposed as a bigger fool than Stan himself.
James Randi is extremely relevant since he can offer funding for this project. The first person that shows a 2HP generator running on water on its own in a closed loop with the water fuel cell plugged in to the generator, gets 1 million dollars from James Randi. James Randi said that Stan Meyer really did believe his device worked but James Randi claims it was a scam. However James Randi would happily give 1 million dollars to anyone that can prove Stan's device works.
1 million dollars is a way to fund the effort instead of all these poor open source losers screwing around with 10 dollars in their pocket.
Quote from: Torana on June 14, 2012, 02:24:41 AM
He might be famous in someones world but not myn
What does "myn" mean you retard?
Does that mean "byn rate"?
myn rate?
Mine? Bum? Burn?
So you're a retard too, just like Stan Meyer! We should get James Randi to expose your spelling mistakes on his TV show. Torana is a fraud too! Because he made a spelling mistake!
Oh I'm whining and complaining like a little 3 year old girl. My name is Torana and I can'ter proparely spellls mine
Then there is h2opower, "for I, for I, for I have discovered the science, for I, well for I have explained the science behind Stan Mayers, for I, For I have discovered the science, for I."
For I!
What buffoonery!
Quacks and buffoons all over the forums.. James Randi would love to be here! He'd probably commit suicide if he had to visit these forums.
Ive said in this thread , I dont support open source, did you read it?
Ive also written about the spelling in this thread.....did you read that bit too?
****James Randi is relaphant 2 U and NOT Mi!
Do you know T woodside is one of the "Buffoons" (as you refer to) , is on on ionizationx ?
Alex petty- RWG ? (out standing actually!)
I am familiar with wire gauge= its part of the job!**
I have quoted SM word for word- and THAT is what I have responded to.
IF stan says AWG , HE is influencing alot of people. eg; T woodside, G woodside, irondmax.............and there fore YOU!
Have you told those guys the extent that you disagree with SM info?
ask them if they use a slide coil ? Do YOU yourself intend to make a slide coil ?
Where did I say SM fuel cell did not work? be specific= name the date and post #
Where have I made "fun" of SM ? thats YOUR judgement and perception, personally I have never met SM.
can you actually pinpoint if I am FOR or Against SM ?
So why ARE you attacking me? ....and what with? you havent presented anything!
Im not part of the RWG,ionizationx/T woodside Quack,Buffoonery,paranoid crowd....or ou.com either
Ive written of the mistakes in the info and film presented by SM...form the view point of an Electrician!
YOUR view point is what???
whats your level of understanding or EE theory , ANY practical experience??
Its YOUR responsibility to school yourself not M I N E! :-* (dying to M Y N but thats not allowed)
So who do you call "WE" ? you might find your just a cash paying customer.
What sparked this out burst? ahh thats right "unicorn coil" FIG 1-1 VIC = BOGUS!!
IF....or when you get around to it ...YOUR gonna find out 1st hand
Hate to be the 1 to break it to you but...H2Opower is using T woodsides circuit, no diff from irondmax....the same 1 YOU "intend" on using yourself, so you might as well cozy up to that thought.. bit of a twist there .....H2Opower built what you want to attempt.
Are you sure you want to call him a Buffoon?
Notice I didnt rip into him , or anyone else either!
And I dont see how you can label the guy racist .
personally I have never met the guy, I thought he was canadian!
Here you go = this seems to be the foundation on which you stand , its all youve got!
http://www.free-energy-info.com/MeyerData.pdf (http://www.free-energy-info.com/MeyerData.pdf)
http://www.free-energy-info.com/P8.pdf (http://www.free-energy-info.com/P8.pdf)
http://www.rtbot.net/irondmax (http://www.rtbot.net/irondmax)
http://globalkast.com/documentation.htm (http://globalkast.com/documentation.htm)
http://globalkast.com/products.htm (http://globalkast.com/products.htm)
notice at the bottom..."All circuits are for experimental purpose only!"
....Do read that bit!
When you recover from your melt down , why dont you contact T woodside or irondmax and question the validity of the stock pile of SM info. After all its your "Hard earned" money your gonna be spending
You could also take the opportunity to tell them Stans info is full of mistakes.....according to you!.
**maybe you could point out some examples to them, you didnt seem to share any with me!
....but then I dont think you had any, if you did, itd be pointless to react the way you have on this thread here.
As it turns out , your actually the SM basher but at the same time you intend to replicate ???
that must create alot of internal frustration to be carrying around.
How do you vent all that frustration ?? :-*
Quote from: Torana on June 15, 2012, 03:56:29 AM
why dont you contact T woodside or irondmax and question the validity of the stock pile of SM info.
Who says I'm not in contact with some people? Why do you presume that you're so much smarter than everyone else?
Why don't you contact them?
I've already contacted IronDMax about coil wire and enamel specs (certain coil wire will melt down if it doesn't have strong poly enamel coating on it) and Stan left some air space in his coil probably to prevent melt down.
The problem with people like IronDMax is they are believers in the technology and they don't want to do actual measurements, they just want to believe in the technology. I for example asked IronDMax to do some actual tests on the steam resonator to see how fast it heated up the water and am waiting for the response - but as they are believers in the technology, they likely don't much care.
Just because IronDmax and Woodside has done some good work, doesn't mean they are 100 percent scientists or 100 percent proper engineers willing to do proper tests.
Quote from: Torana on June 15, 2012, 03:56:29 AM
After all its your "Hard earned" money your gonna be spending
Not really, I can turn around and sell all the components for more than what I paid for since I bought them in bulk and sell electronics parts as a hobby anyway.
Quote from: Torana on June 15, 2012, 03:56:29 AM
You could also take the opportunity to tell them Stans info is full of mistakes.....according to you!.
It is full of many mistakes and Stan was also a Jesus freak which I am not afraid to bash him for.
Why would I waste time writing down all the mistakes here for you to see when you have an extremely condescending attitude? Why would I want to speak to someone like you who is condescending and obnoxious?
What will you gain from it if I provide you with my mistake information I've found?
for example one mistake is "voltage performs work". Actually, the molecules perform work, not voltage.
Are you building the devices or are you just here to be condescending? what are you gaining out of this if you aren't even participating in the 9XB builds? are you just here to complain about Stan because you don't have the skills to solder the circuits up? are you poor and can't afford them? If you aren't willing to waste the time buildling the circuits, why bother wasting your time on forums whining about Stan's spelling mistakes?
By the way you made some more spelling mistakes yourself you hypocritical fool.. you said "Form" instead of "From".
Really: look in the mirror before criticizing Stan. You sound like you are Stan Meyer yourself - all the spelling mistakes give it away.
Quote from: Torana on June 15, 2012, 03:56:29 AM
....but then I dont think you had any, if you did, itd be pointless to react the way you have on this thread here.
You just made another mistake, you can't use apostrophe's correctly. ITD is not a word. dont is not a word.
Really, look in the mirror you hypocritical fool.
If you criticize Stan for spelling errors, and that's exactly what you do in your postings..... all I can say is:
hypocrite.hypocrite.hypocrite.hypocrite.hypocrite.hypocrite.hypocrite.hypocrite.hypocrite.hypocrite.hypocrite.
Quote from: Torana on June 15, 2012, 03:38:32 AM
Notice I didnt rip into him , or anyone else either!
And I dont see how you can label the guy racist .
personally I have never met the guy, I thought he was canadian!
Yes you did rip into him you liar. Some of his posts are deleted and strangely missing. There was a point in the conversation where you quoted him and ridiculed him.
He is against Canadians and is racist toward Canadians.
His idea is that "they don't teach science up there".
It's exactly the opposite... they don't teach science "down there" in the more southern states where Creationism and Jesus prevails.
Quote from: Torana on June 15, 2012, 03:38:32 AM
Hate to be the 1 to break it to you but...H2Opower is using T woodsides circuit, no diff from irondmax....the same 1 YOU "intend" on using yourself, so you might as well cozy up to that thought.. bit of a twist there .....H2Opower built what you want to attempt.
What a straw man argument... do you have a mental disorder of some kind, may I ask?
You seem to be missing basic logic skills.
Some people drive Honda's that are complete idiots and buffoons, so all Honda drivers are buffoons?
Do you know about something called logic and reasoning? because you don't seem to be able to reason or use logic.
If you see one white horse, does that mean all horses are white?
Are you familiar with basic logical reasoning and logical fallacy?
I don't care if Microsoft's Bill Gates has tried the 9XB circuit, that wouldn't make any difference to me.
Even if the buffoon known as Torana drove a honda, I wouldn't stop building or buying honda's just because one buffoon drove a honda.
Yes you need to look up "logical reasoning" and "logical fallacy" and "Argumentum ad populum" on google. Educate yourself.
Torana: "I saw a white horse, therefore logically all horses must be white."
Torana: "I saw a buffoon and complete idiot building a 9XB Stan Meyer circuit, therefore anyone who builds a 9XB is a white horse too"
really, are you that stupid? do you even know what a logical fallacy is? Not likely since you're obviously not educated by Text books on logic and reasoning.
What??
Am I poor? too poor to buy a Harley,car,house,lawn mower..... ???
whats my job? did you read this thread?
did you see the E.I.T manual ? whoops educated I self...
Show me where Ive complained and who to? what about? is there a complaints department?
am I complaining to you? what about?
did you read what I said about spelling/SM spelling /spell check??
wheres H2Opowers posts deleted and strangely missing? why not ask him NOT ME!
http://www.truegreensolutions.net (http://www.truegreensolutions.net)
http://hereticalbuilders.com/showthread.php?t=174 (http://hereticalbuilders.com/showthread.php?t=174)
I actually miss him/her/canadian
No! I did NOT rip into H2Opower and he didnt break down like you have.
Am I supposed to use smiley faces when ever I use Humour ? is that a rule for computer geeks?
like ...."I thought he was canadian!" :)
"label the guy racist" :)
"Homble is spelt wrong" :)
"you is b'oring" :)
"you is a' waste of space!" :)
"you is a' hobbyist"
"We using a 9'XB" :)
"RRR you' serious?" :)
"you driv'e a Honda!" :)
"you b'uild Hondas?" :)
Extremely condescending attitude? are you aware at all of your behaviour or how you react?
what triggered it?
Have I ripped into you? you appear to simply fall apart , if you can apply that to water , youre on ya way to your first million bucks!
Have you run out of steam ?
thats what is called = Loss of control! or lack of control..
I dont frequent these types of sites, look at the dates! have you read the thread?
obnoxious = very unpleasant; offensive
offensive = attacking- hostile action
**take a look at your behaviour = hostile?....attacking?...
White Horse ? yea- I did see 1 . My sister had 7 horses= 1 black,1 white, 1 tan, 1 dapple, 3 brown. 2 were Gelding the rest were mares, 1 of which was a race horse= Patrae
we also had sheeps and cowz. ****Just ask if ya need photos.
So to reply to you..No! not all horses are white,female or a race horse.
Why is it that the subject of Stan Meyers sends certain people in loops? ;)
According to SM , he used 2 books as reference
1; SAMS modern dictionary of electronics RF Graf
2; handbook of chemistry and physics 68th ed.
throughout SM docs he has the chem formulas
GASOLINE C10 H8
NATURAL GAS C5 H12
wheres the spelling mistakes? ...there are NONE , therefore that rules out micofische error, photo copier error ,optical character recognition error, fax error, type writer error, aswell as ruling out Human error.
Can SM reference ;hand book of chem and physics- be used to confirm those formulas?
Can the book be ruled out as a source of any error?
No chemistry book on Earth will support those formulas.
Through out SM docs and diagrams he has the dielectric value of water
= 78.54 OHMS @ 25c
wheres the spelling mistake? there is NONE, therefore that rules out microfische error, photocopier error, optical character recognition error, fax error, type writer error as well as Human error.
Can SM reference ; SAMS Mod dictionary of electronics -be used to confirm that measurement ?
Can the book be ruled out as the source of any error?
No EE/electronics/physics book on Earth will support that dielectric value,simply because it is NOT a dielectric value
If there is no human error then the other option to consider is = Intentional deception based on how many times it was REPRINTED in diff docs -unedited and over the length of time it was sold while he was alive
Theres 32 E formulas in the TB , 9 are completely BOGUS and can NOT be traced back to SAMS Mod Dict of Electronics or any other book on planet earth.
One would think ,there must be a Logical explanation why that would be.
only 7 apply to AC freq and 6 are simply filler.
SM info is rejected on EE,electronics and sciece forums on the basis that it is full of "mistakes" and non existant formulas followed by gibberish.
probably the single most important post= mindee4000
" so what the hell...since when permittivity is ohmic Resistance?
water permittivity is not the same as water ohmic Resistance"
=TRUE ..yet SM has written it repeatedly throughout his diagrams and docs as 78.54 OHMS.
Some how the post was directed at me ,so I thought it only fair to point out who the actual person responsible for any Misguidance.
When considering water conductance , 1 cant go past infinite permittivity of a conductor or water as a solvent , (solvation) oopps SM didnt mention that bit.
the only person in history who said water dielectric value is measured in OHMs is stan meyer ,and the only people in the world who continue to say it are SM devotees.
Ive seen a pattern thru the years where people try to separate religion from SM info in an attempt to legitimise the info but some how that doesnt work, its like peeling off layers of an onion and finding a LEMON.
The only positive out come is when people do their own research and before long SM info is abandoned . = the step forward.
Quote from: canufi on June 02, 2012, 04:58:09 PM
The point of using household power supply is to get a 120V generator running on hydrogen instead of gasoline, and also to get home heating systems working based on the steam resonator. This technology is not just for cars, it is for households too.
Anyone who tries to get a car running on hydrogen is wasting their time. Small 1HP or 2HP generators are much easier to get running. A car is very heavy and is very costly if it fails. A 2HP generator is $200 or less (4 stroke) and is much easier to experiment with, and easier to get running than a car or truck.
Get rid of your ego problems first; get a generator running first - not a truck or car!
What kind of moron would try and get a 3500 pound vehicle running on hydrogen, when you can get an electrical generator for $200 at harbor freight or your nearest hardware store? Not only can you get a generator running on hydrogen, you can get many of them running so that if one fails you have many backups. IF your dune buggy fails, you're screwed! you only have one dune buggy. Having more than one dune buggy is costly and time consuming. Cars are complex. Generators are not complex. Stop wasting your time getting cars to run, do it in baby steps - the generator comes first!
The amount of idiots involved in Stan Meyer replication astounds me.
If you cannot get a 2HP generator running on hydrogen, then it is NOT worth spending time on a 3500 pound volkswagon car. You're wasting your time.
A 2HP generator produces electricity and it only does that. A car does a thousand things. You don't need a thousand things, all you need is electricity. A generator is much more efficient than a car. Forget cars and trucks, just get a damn generator working. Generators can produce 120V and 12V electricity for the cell to run in a closed loop. If a generator doesn't run in a closed loop, then stan's device is not over unity, and it is not extracting energy from another source - it's just 80 percent efficiency or 60 percent, or 90 percent.
well well canufi hows your generator project coming along.?
I havnt been here for a while, I must say ive enjoyed Torana's kiwi humour and well mannered replies to you canufi......now if only you have slowed down a bit and asked better questions i suggest you may have had a better response. :)
tell me canufi, why would you think I would spend my time and money on a 2hp generator to run on H when we both know the wattage output of such small generators is hardly worth the effort of such a small machine that wouldnt be very useful for the variety of applications one might intend.........?
ego? moi? . lol :) i think you should have yours in for a check up.
when you are able, how about a picture or two of your successful 120v board being applied as a operational piece to running your generator. For im curious to see how you may obtain 120v to supply the component you are building which obviously requires the power well before the generator could....start up. :) portable generator? maybe or not.? :)
have a pleasant day
cheers
personally I thought post # 139 was funny , ......apparently no.
I was expecting rave reviews but instead all I got was a PM telling me to go touch myself!!
"Such is life" (n.kelly 1880)
I cant Nor wont recommend anyone exp with HV coils of a CRT screen or anything mains connected.
Ive put links on this thread for flybacks, its the quickest method of getting HV DC .
FBT is a power L /disruptive discharge coil/ coupled L / LOPT .
On 1st stage the sec is open circuited and presents no opposition to pri.
the core and Air gap store energy.
that stored energy is released thru discharge stage.
**sec is forward bias while the pri open circuited.
**FBT are NOT based on winding ratios like AC transformers.
the pic is of a standard TV 230v board with no alteration , just removal from case and CRT screen then plugged into mains.
the arc is to chassis earth, min 30kv.
the input signal is saw tooth, the out put is 1/2 wave rect that **can be smoothed by a HV cap to chassis earth
input approx 125 x 125 = 15625 hz
FBT is the quickest way to learn about HV water bridging and polarisation and effects of HV DC with out soldering a thing.
EXP at your own risk!!
stans pat #4936961 -1990 ; 78.54 @20c 1 ATM = correct
...24 AWG and 36 AWG ...(Whoa!)
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/PatE1.pdf (http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/PatE1.pdf)
stans pat #5149407 -1992 ; 78.54 @29 c 1 ATM = correct
....24 AWG and 36 AWG ....(Whoa! x 2)
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/PatE4.pdf (http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/PatE4.pdf)
seems the patent attourneys office descended into Buffoonery.....No BWG
thanx, had a quick look.
searched address = no such thing. look like crooks 1-800-CHEEP
http://affordablealarmservice.com (http://affordablealarmservice.com) www. what? who?
http://lebogaragetowing.com (http://lebogaragetowing.com) no email/no emergency tow number/no owner of any kind....must be a "franchise" because its got a few diff street addresses and 1/2 dozen ph numbers.
Kansas.."theres no place like home"
Tim carty and rob Harsch ? arent they the guys from green dreams energy?...doesnt mention stephen meyers any where.
must be ass. of tom howard/ Fred.
http://tomhoward.ws/Home.htm (http://tomhoward.ws/Home.htm)
"small group of scientists,engineers and inventors in CANADA!! REAL SHARP!!!
" 50 to 300 MPG"
there fore @ 50 MPH = 1 hour to turn 1 gallon of water into gas vs 6 hours to achieve the same result .......WOW!!
according to fast freddy - he invented the Hydrostar door stop.
Doh!! forgot to mention the trucks , that champayne coloured number is a double sleeper cab .....= Long haul tractor unit , not a towie by any description.
the black 1 is a tilt-a deck 2 axle and the white 1 is a 2 axle with tow arm boom and hook.
..theyre only pics.
none have out standing logos or plates or open advertising....whats the company colours?
black? white? champayne?
theres a pic of what is supposedly a monkey under the hood but then thats the champayne truck yet again!. ever heard of over-alls when working under the hood?
hes dressed like a cow boy ..oh dear.
but the best bit of all is the address........there is no physical ,only a box
and then theres the st number ,have a google = 2746 fauna rd lebo kansas 66856
"conveniently located off I35"
very interesting when looked at on google maps ,reminds me of Robert Johnson.
1-800-missingtowco or 1-800-bellended
"sincerely s meyers, r harsch ,t carty" meyer devotees are an easy mark.
then theres the dick head standing by the truck that has VN 430 480 serial written below the door ,what that translates to in USA ,who knows , may pin them or maybe its only a class number
J,
the name Hythane was trademarked.
the atmosphere has the Hydroxyl layer.
good luck!
H2 hythane H OH
C H4 methane C H3 OH methyl
C2H6 ethane C2H5 OH ethyl
C3H8 propane C3H7 OH propyl
C4H10 butane C4H9 OH butyl
Myn favorit quotes of 2012 , ???
Quote from: canufi on June 02, 2012, 04:21:22 PM
why have people successfully replicated the 8XA circuit such as youtube users TonyWoodside and Irondmax?
A kettle is 99 percent efficient since the heater in a kettle transfers all heat to the water
kettle's at walmart for cheap are already 99 percent efficient
..........
Quote from: canufi on June 02, 2012, 04:58:09 PM
Get rid of your ego problems first;
The amount of idiots involved in Stan Meyer replication astounds me.
:)
Quote from: canufi on June 14, 2012, 06:28:38 AM
they are full of buffoons including "h2opower" who is a racist american that thinks canadians are stupid, and that americans are smart. In fact quite the opposite: the southern jesus loving rednecks in the U.S.A. are stupid.
Quote from: canufi on June 14, 2012, 06:49:20 AM
.. James Randi would love to be here! He'd probably commit suicide
Re: TonyWoodside 8XA Raise 1 litre water 15C To 90C in one Seccond ? (http://www.overunity.com/11385/tonywoodside-8xa-raise-1-litre-water-15c-to-90c-in-one-seccond/msg324462/#msg324462) « Reply #8 on: May 30, 2012, 08:12:31 AM » LOL LOL LOL
Seriously, in one second? That sounds like baloney to me.
(......and then buy 1 !! :) )
j
1; Ive seen that video before
2; use Z = sq root of L/C .... then use (because Z=X) ... f = X / 2 pi L .... it illiminates the reso f and Xc formulas , shouldnt take more than a min or so,its the quickest . I already posted it ages ago
j
**theoretically** the velocity of an electron in AC field = net zero (reso)
search velocity of e in a DC field in a conductor I/nAq , you might be surprised.
flyback is NOT a step up transformer , it has NO transformer action , it has NO winding ratio, its a POWER INDUCTOR , it completely discharges + has idle time + is 1/2 wave.
*a transformer is incapable of that.
fbt only behaves as a transformer if wired as a mazzilli ZVS push pull non gapped type set up...THEN it has a winding ratio and lower volts out
i already posted links ages ago....
H,
no where have I tried to stop any one or rip into anyone. havent manipulated anyone into spending their money .
canufi ripped into me , not once did i rip into him, simply because he had nothing going for him. i said he was boring and a waste of space, other than that he seems to be friendly .
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2FThemes%2Fdefault%2Fimages%2Fuseroff.gif&hash=62d32ca46470bc4d6fa32aaee2c7517a28b0d034) (http://www.overunity.com/pm/canufi.52421/sa/send/) canufi (http://www.overunity.com/profile/canufi.52421/)
- Newbie
- (https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2FThemes%2Fdefault%2Fimages%2Fstar.gif&hash=2a570f84975afe1c1e6073967208467f03f9aa7b)
- Posts: 47
-
- (https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2FThemes%2Fdefault%2Fimages%2Ficons%2Fprofile_sm.gif&hash=b419aeae94b94284798e1a6f336ca50e99b1bc9c) (http://www.overunity.com/profile/canufi.52421/)
- (https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2FThemes%2Fdefault%2Fimages%2Fwww_sm.gif&hash=fe391f4ae72525398944bff915bbdcc23c8b0a27) (http://www.youtube.com/user/canufi)
- (https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2FThemes%2Fdefault%2Fimages%2Fim_off.gif&hash=d5bab7af0626ae19f43991ec1c80517ae304bb24) (http://www.overunity.com/pm/canufi.52421/sa/send/)
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2FThemes%2Fdefault%2Fimages%2Fpost%2Fxx.gif&hash=8fec86f8517889daf04b2682e9e2f560f82c7df3) Re: Relative Permittivity of Water (http://www.overunity.com/9856/relative-permittivity-of-water/msg324716/#msg324716) «
Reply #195 on: June 02, 2012, 11:26:31 PM »
- Quote (http://www.overunity.com/9856/relative-permittivity-of-water/195/post/quote/324716/last_msg/353630/)
Quote from: Torana on September 02, 2011, 03:23:30 AM (http://www.overunity.com/9856/relative-permittivity-of-water/msg299363/#msg299363)
A choke with a wiper arm is mythical other than an air core crystal radio set ,which is normal.
Theres screw slug cores or on a large scale , Ferranti style moving coils.
**Its a Unicorn coil = BOGUS!
You think a variable inductor is bogus? Really?
Quote from wikipedia:
"A variable inductor can be constructed by making one of the terminals of the device a sliding spring contact that can move along the surface of the coil, increasing or decreasing the number of turns of the coil included in the circuit. An alternative construction method is to use a moveable magnetic core, which can be slid in or out of the coil. Moving the core farther into the coil increases the permeability, increasing the inductance. Many inductors used in radio applications (usually less than 100 MHz) use adjustable cores in order to tune such inductors to their desired value, since manufacturing processes have certain tolerances (inaccuracy). " he quoted wiki...I posted the same thing in 32 words , clearly he couldnt see it nor google ferranti to save himself....I mean save himself!
again = " a choke coil with a wiper arm is mythical"
the universal symbol for a vari L = a diagonal arrow across a coil
who has used a slide coil and HV? then again who has used a choke of 11600 ohms?
#199 on: June 11, 2012, 10:42:12 PM » Quote (http://www.overunity.com/9856/relative-permittivity-of-water/195/post/quote/325550/last_msg/354029/)
Quote from: Torana on June 03, 2012, 03:45:32 AM (http://www.overunity.com/9856/relative-permittivity-of-water/msg324732/#msg324732)
Stans "circuits" are for entertainment value only.
Please look up Tony Woodside and Gary Woodside and Irondmax on youtube who have successfully replicated the distilled water and tap water cells which break apart water with the 9XB and 8XA circuits.
= thats what canufi asked....thats what I did .....then he rips into me..nice one!
Quote from: Torana on June 03, 2012, 03:45:32 AM (http://www.overunity.com/9856/relative-permittivity-of-water/msg324732/#msg324732)
If a walmart kettle is 99% eff then what is a water R eff ?
What the hell is a water R eff? Water resistor efficiency?
...Bingo! ...hes never heard of a water resistor, shoulda googled , they been in use for 50 - 100 years, and Im not talking about 99 % eff kettles....
Quote from: canufi on June 15, 2012, 07:32:00 AM
It is full of many mistakes and Stan was also a Jesus freak which I am not afraid to bash him for.
Why would I waste time writing down all the mistakes here for you to see when you have an extremely condescending attitude? Why would I want to speak to someone like you who is condescending and obnoxious?
What will you gain from it if I provide you with my mistake information I've found?
...... If he found so many mistakes then wouldnt he agree with the post? but no wait hes discovered more mistakes ....and THEN hes saving his pennys for a 9XB.
he must ride the fence raw with that line of thinking.
Im not surprised at all if hes ripped into you on a diff site.
as james randi .....Ive never heard of him before or since , he might be famous in someones villiage but not MYN :-*
Quote from: minde4000 on January 28, 2011, 08:57:15 PM
So what the hell... since when permittivity is ohmic resistance?
Water permitivity is not the same as water ohmic resistance...
Minde
this is what started it ...google "78.54 ohms" and it will show the affect stan meyers has had , which is not a good one.
http://nz.bing.com/search?q=78.54+ohms&src=IE-SearchBox&FORM=IE8SRC (http://nz.bing.com/search?q=78.54+ohms&src=IE-SearchBox&FORM=IE8SRC)
never in my life have I mixed permittivity with ohmic resistance, the numbers I used were from alex petty, naudin and steve (?) , in no way could I manipulate their figures , plain and simple.
the thread name "Relative Permittivity of Water" .....soon enuff some one was going to post 78.54 OHMS = completely wrong and misguided info spread by stan meyers .
It is BOGUS!!
Quote from: minde4000 on February 23, 2011, 10:38:04 AM
Whatever you say man... I see no point to argue with you here.
Appereantly many of your "dictionaries" are wrong. Because dielectric is NOT the same as ohmic insulator.. altho all insulators have dielectric values but thats not the same as ohmic value.
It is the way it is and no dictionaries can change that.
I just wish you kept your personal theories to yourself.. so many others would not be misguided by reading your posts..
No dictionary any where in the world states dielectric being measured in ohms or being an ohmic insulator or having resistive measurement.
therefore NONE of my "dictionaries" are wrong
I havent put fwd any personal theories so by rights NO ONE should be misguided by reading my posts if any thing they should wake up.
Its humorous how people get bent out of shape.
"dielectric is NOT the same as ohmic insulator.. " ......YET stan meyers pushed that very idea and misguided thousands of people ......and YET no one in the SM flock sayeth a thingeth. ???
Its only fitting to redirect the finger and crank it round to point square at stan meyers.
I didnt write the tech brief
Quote from: Torana on August 12, 2011, 07:02:51 PM
Stan Meyers Tech Brief
7-3; "The established dielectric value of water (85) being 78.54 ohms"
7-4: " a resistive liquid (having an ohmic value of 78.54 ohms)
7-8; "the dielectric property of water (being 78.54 ohms @ 25c )
a resistive liquid ????? ohmic value??
.......cccrank goes the finger!
canufi would put that down as a spelling mistake or microfiche or even human error.
the tech brief IS intentional deception, the standard key board does not have the OMEGA symbol, thats TYPE SETTING NOT human error at all .
1 Omega = ohms
2 Resistive is spelt a whole lot diff from dielectric
its intentional to use 1 or the other word , stan used both!
theres too much type set "human error" that its a human error to consider the tech brief of any value at all.
no one has ever designed ,developed,built and patented a circuit without knowing fundamental electrical theory and then been unable to explain how their circuit works whilst at the same time referring to SAMS mod dict of electronics (1984)
steve meyers also cant find the words to describe a circuit function, funny that
w,
those are trigger coils = self reso of the core. http://www.powerlabs.org/flybackdriver.htm (http://www.powerlabs.org/flybackdriver.htm)
supposedly Horvath patent had a self reso transformer but the patent drawing is wired NOT to work , its totally stuffed circuit drawing.
horvath circ has UJT timer =predates 555 chip mfg.
flat FBT coils are the AC type = hard to find
tall FBT coils are DC out put type already reactified
BJT transistors run hot not many use them anymore
w,
flyback has a cycle = charge, store, discharge, idle
a transformer cant do that ,theres pri + sec ,expand and contract , thats it! no matter how you wind it
cap = charge , store, discharge . thats what water caps do at sandia , thats what water caps do in lasers. thats what caps do
good luck mate