Quote from: ARMCORTEX on January 11, 2016, 12:02:12 AM
But is OU attainable if you make it explode?

This is a presentation of my Stan Meyer demonstration cell replication as seen on the documentary film, "It Runs on Water". The water bath is comprised of normal tap water with no added electrolyte. The cell can run for hours and the water temperature remains under 73 degrees F.

This is not a perpetual motion device. I assure you that when the cell runs out of water, it will surely cease to operate. It will always require fuel, which in this case, is regular tap water out of the tap. The fuel is cheap, but it is not free, thus it is really NOT overunity, any more than an engine running on gasoline is.  This is NOT a fuel-less system.

It generates enough hydrogen to fuel an internal combustion engine which in turn is able to take over the total power supply input to the system with plenty of power left over for auxiliary electrical appliances/devices.

QuoteIt generates enough hydrogen to fuel an internal combustion engine which in turn is able to take over the total power supply input to the system with plenty of power left over for auxiliary electrical appliances/devices.

So many people have claimed... and so many people have failed to demonstrate. So now it's up to _you_ to PROVE this claim.

The laws of thermodynamics and electrochemistry say you cannot.

TK, Just curious - I know you are very skeptical about OU.  But can we agree that hydrogen rise up by itself,  and if you let it go very high and burn it there can you use the product-the water -to generate extra power on the way down (which is than a function of the height used)  ?

Quote from: TinselKoala on January 12, 2016, 10:46:59 AM
The laws of thermodynamics and electrochemistry say you cannot.

And that is the reason some have chosen to go around those laws, because when you use them, you only get what you pay for.

The other issue is proof...

The team I'm familiar with only intend to prove to themselves Stan Meyer was right.  They refuse to prove it to anyone else.  Not their job.

What I know at the moment is at least one of these cells is producing a highly energetic fuel from simply rain water using far less power than the laws say is required.

I'm only the messenger.  Shoot me if you must, but it doesn't change a thing.

Quote from: TinselKoala on January 12, 2016, 10:46:59 AM
So many people have claimed... and so many people have failed to demonstrate. So now it's up to _you_ to PROVE this claim.

The laws of thermodynamics and electrochemistry say you cannot.

I don't know if you know how many times that MAN made laws have been written only to be broken and then re-written again, but this is reality.  Anti-gravity devices were said to be in violation of Newton's law, yet some of these anti-gravity devices were recently declassified and stunned many in the scientific community.  Men writing the laws of science have been wrong before and I am certain they will be wrong again as long as mortal men are writing them down.  Unless you are the exception and you are perfect, then I shall retract my words.

Now I'm not going to prove anything.  I am simply going to replicate something that has already been done...

Vehicle idling on tap water:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ytu-vwudz4

Vehicle driving on tap water:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a74uarqap2E

Just as I have replicated Meyer's initial demonstration cell, I will also replicate his internal combustion engine demonstration.  I'm using a different engine, but his initial cell technology will be fueling it. 

First things first, though.  I intend to improve on Meyer's technology by further pushing the envelope in terms of gas production.  After solving Meyer's original technology, a whole new world has opened up to me.  There are things I had to "unlearn" in order to proceed. 

But practice your recitals of the science bible gospel if you must.  It does tend to make one look learned 

As for me, I'll be driving that "impossible" car into tomorrow.


Peace & love,

Chess