Overunity electrolysis - 31 times more effective gas production than with DC

[MarkE]

Scenario D continued – "resonance break up" of Water molecules into some gas mixtures.

10. Zero point energy is often referred to the energy that will still be present when the temperature reaches absolute zero degrees.  The assumption is that thermal energy is zero.  However, in any space, there will always be electromagnetic waves and gravitational forces.  I assume that electromagnetic wave is the "Lead-out" or "Bring-in" Energy Source in this case.

More assumptions.  The problem with ZPE is that it is the foundation on which all other energy in our realm rests.  It doesn't "Lead-out" or "Bring-in" any energy.

11. The "gas mixture" may contain different levels of electromagnetic waves.  At the "resonance frequency", small stimulus from the outside may excite the "internal set up of the gas mixture" to break up the hydrogen and oxygen bonds.  This break up will release energy much larger than the sum of the outside stimulus.  This is the "Lead-out or "Bring-in" Energy Source.  In other words, the Energy is already available in the surrounding environment and the "water or gas mixture".  It is a matter of releasing them.  Such energy can easily be replenlished by the electromagnetic waves from the surrounding (or from Zero Point energy as some would like to call it).

This idea is pure speculation on your part that is without supporting evidence.  If you are enamored with your speculation go conduct experiments to see if you can break up water molecules at better than Faraday efficiency by any means that you choose.

12.  If a "resonance setup" can release such energy, the Stan Meyer car is theoretically possible.  The Stan Meyer device does not use implosion as it deliberately fed exhaust gas back into the combustion chamber – making use of explosion instead of implosion.

If wishes were true ...  This is more pure speculation that is refuted by available evidence.

13. If the "resonance setup" is to be detected via the "hit and miss" method, the chance of getting a reproducible "hit" and accepted by the scientific community will be like winning the lottery.  Skeptics will keep saying – fraud and scam.

Skeptics will keep saying: "Show me the evidence that supports your extraordinary claims."  It is not the fault of skeptics that you remain empty-handed or that you have an established history of promoting unworkable free energy ideas.

14. The successful team is likely to be one with Government Support.  They do not need to worry about mortgages and living expenses.  They can buy the most expensive and accurate scientific instruments.  (I learned the lesson of using the US$120 Atten Oscilloscope to try to get accurate results from the tiny Joule Thief Energy experiments).  They can have trained scientists and engineers to tune the equipment and correctly analyze the results.  They can build special scientific apparatus to do mid-stage verifications.  They can focus on "resonance tuning" for months or years without the wife or husband nagging.  They do not need to publish results and get jeered at.  They do not need to worry about venture capitalists or investors wanting to see results for their money or suing them in court.

Even a low cost $60 Hantek oscilloscope yields valid data when used by someone who knows what they are doing.  A $250,000 oscilloscope is perfectly able to yield garbage data in the hands of someone who does not know what they are doing.  Steven Jones used a very nice $10,000. oscilloscope improperly when he reported 8X over unity from his JT circuits.

15. I would expect the successful team will have to overcome the objections from other scientists who claim that since Perpetual Motion Machine is theoretically impossible, they are waiting their time and the Government Resources.  They may have to use the Lead-out or Bring-in Energy theory to overcome this first hurdle.  They have to study and re-think electrolysis; implosion; chemical reactions; electron cloud distributions; kinetic theory of gases; confirm the adiabatic energy exchange of the water bottle rocket; structure of "water gas"; resonance and resonance circuits, etc.  A whole research team or a new department at a University may need to be set up.  Many PhD students may be used to check out the hundreds of overunity claims on the Internet.

Extraordinary ideas require hard evidence.  And that is what all over unity claims presently lack.

16. I expect my contribution will just be the Lead-out or Bring-in Energy theory.  Other posts will be treated as "speculation" from an old man who spends much time fishing, talking about politics and religion.  These posts will not be taken seriously.  This is perfectly acceptable.  Divine revealation may surprise us all.  A "speculation" may turn out to be the scientific truth.

If you wish to make a meaningful contribution then stop promoting claims before properly investigating them and learn to account for energy correctly.

More to come later.

[MarkE]

Buy a toy water rocket.  Measure its temperature before and after the firing.

A toy water rocket has nothing to do with your erroneous energy balance accounting.

[ARMCORTEX]

Lawrence I have a question for you.

Would it be easier to pulse a wheel with 4 x  (or 2 x) heavy weights and light frame , or a totally uniform mass distribution flywheel with no definite ''frequency'', an infinite number of small pendulums so to speak. While a 4 x mass point could have 1 tapping  (or 2) per weight, as they accelerate already. I have an idea for program controllable hammer like kinetic pulser, not magnet, but blunt mass with retractable high strenght steel solenoid tip.

You say ''to pulse @ wrong time a pendulum is counter productive''. How to identify right time with uniform flywheel ? Would it be simpler to design a stick flywheel with 2 weights @ tips ?

[ltseung888]

Lawrence I have a question for you.

Would it be easier to pulse a wheel with 4 x  (or 2 x) heavy weights and light frame , or a totally uniform mass distribution flywheel with no definite ''frequency'', an infinite number of small pendulums so to speak. While a 4 x mass point could have 1 tapping  (or 2) per weight, as they accelerate already. I have an idea for program controllable hammer like kinetic pulser, not magnet, but blunt mass with retractable high strenght steel solenoid tip.

You say ''to pulse @ wrong time a pendulum is counter productive''. How to identify right time with uniform flywheel ? Would it be simpler to design a stick flywheel with 2 weights @ tips ?

The easiest experiment to determine the right frequency for a swing is shown in the Milkovic 2 stage pendulum.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gC6Qlj1Mbo8

If you have an unbalanced wheel, you can pulse it at different rotational speeds.  In the case of the Tong wheel, we determined the best pulsing time experimentally.   The device was adjsted until the current reading was minimum. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gC6Qlj1Mbo8

We did not experiment with uniform flysheel.

[Marshallin]

Guys too much theorizing is happpening in this forum.

Please make experimets and share your findings with us(or dont).
There is realy no point od arguing who is right. And so far as I know is not posible to split water just by making post on the internet.