Quote from: zerotensorHere I have marked-up the schematic for single-wire transmission to include a water capacitor cell.The cell is situated in series with the transmission line.  The load can be part of the power supply for the transmitter!

That's an interesting idea because let's say you hooked up the WFC as indicated. The voltage on both sides of the cell would then be equal since that is the nature of a single-wire transmission line. Therefore no voltage difference exists across the water gap, and no electric field, and thus no electron current either. However, the voltage, despite being equal across the gap, still changes over time due to the whole thing being powered by a tesla coil. Therefore the water would be exposed to a gradient-free time-varying scalar potential as I wrote in the post above. Perhaps this alone will not split the water. That's why Avramenko in that article said there was only a cold plasma, and no gas-generation. But -- if on top of this field, you added a small DC field (say from a 12 Volt supply), then you would be exerting a polarizing stress onto the water molecule that is already being exposed to this exotic Avramenko energy. That is what occurs in the Meyer VIC circuit if you hook up the bifilar coil with both coils in phase.

Quotedemartin said:
That's important. You could have a gradient-free scalar potential field that oscillates over time. What kind of work does this produce? Well, the Lorentz gauge shows that divergence of the vector potential is proportional to the time rate of change of scalar potential.

Yes.  The Lorentz gauge is the right choice in this situation, where the vector potential can not be ignored.  @FarrahDay is stuck thinking in terms of the Coulomb gauge, where the vector potential is usually swept under the rug because it is so difficult to calculate.

OK guys, I'll admit to being a bit out of my depth here, but looking at the Avramenko Plug, it is my understanding that this is a method of extracting free electrons from the environment, so only a little current is needed to flow from our power source, thereby providing us with an effectively free energy.  However, electrons are involved and work would seem to be carried out as per usual. So I'm struggling to see its relevance when we don't want any electrons involved.

Maybe there is something in this scalar potential theory, but I can't help thinking that we are not seeing the wood for the trees, and might simply be looking too hard for something that is in fact far more simple and right under our noses. This kind of science was certainly beyond Meyer's understanding.

One thing is clear, if the water molecule is being pulled apart into hydrogen and oxygen atoms by a scalar potential (hence, there is no ionisation involved), then the gas would be given off throughout the liquid medium and not at the electrodes specifically. Moreover, it would also mean that the electrodes do not need to be in direct contact with the water (i.e, can be properly insulated from the water), nor do they need to be stainless steel.

All this I'm afraid goes against everything that we currently accept about the wfc, so is hard to swallow.

We only need ss electrodes in contact with the water because of ionisation, we only need ss electrodes because of the part they play in charge exchanges which produce the gas. If charges on the electrodes are not required, then neither are the ss electrodes. 

I for one am not prepared at this stage to bin all this and go scalar.

resonance breaks stuff, the water molecule does not have just 1 resonate frequency. it has a hydrogen and oxygen atom and who knows what else it has bonding it together. bob did good tuning into the 3.

we know if you play resonance to a glass it will shatter, when the resonance source hits the resonate destination it is amplified to infinity, "it breaks no matter what it is". with water its different, unlike glass it has multible resonance frequencies. harmonics is just the beginning of this understanding, far into the future after we're gone it is the brainiacs that will learn these resonate frequencies and Supur harmonics down to a T to shatter anything desirable.

to break glass you use sound waves, to break water you use static. whatever it may be, the frequencies must be in tune!

Quote from: Farrah DayOne thing is clear, if the water molecule is being pulled apart into hydrogen and oxygen atoms by a scalar potential (hence, there is no ionisation involved), then the gas would be given off throughout the liquid medium and not at the electrodes specifically. Moreover, it would also mean that the electrodes do not need to be in direct contact with the water (i.e, can be properly insulated from the water), nor do they need to be stainless steel.

If the potential field (and here I mean the vector potential as it vibrates longitudinally) plays an important role in Meyer technology, then I think it works more as a "solvent" of the covalent bonding, weakening it. How? As the vector potential changes, so does the quantum phase of an electron, that much is known fact in physics (it's a variation of the Aharanov-Bohm effect). So the covalent electrons would be affected at their most fundamental level, which may change their relation to the hydrogen and oxygen nuclei enough to weaken then bonding. That last part is just my speculation.

Once loosened, you then also need an actual DC electric field to pull the water molecule apart. It would then pull apart easier than without the "solvent" action of the potential field. So the stainless steel tubes are still necessary and must be in contact with the water. The tubes would function as a longitudinal vector potential antenna on top of providing the DC field/current to tug on the water molecule.

If in theÃ,  Hutchison Effect, metal can turn to jelly when exposed to EM standing waves created by Van de Graaf generators and Tesla coils, then couldn't the water molecule likewise be "jellyfied" so that it becomes extremely easy to dissociate with a weak current?Ã,