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

[MarkE]

Sorry mark this cant simulate current surge capability of SITh thyristor.
Right now only way i see is with array of IGBT in paraller

Without specifications of the SIT device there is no way to use numbers for an objective comparison.  I point out both that: IGBTs are available with enormous current handling capabilities, and that it is the MOSFET that limits the maximum current handling capacity in both circuits.

Anyway we all know that indian reaserch is not best. Thats why i post you Japanese one here.

Thanks for that.  The Japanese paper contradicts the Indians.

Very similar one is "Water Electrolysis with Inductive Voltage Pulses ". I think this topic is worth investigating. I dont expect any overunity but it will be nice to have ability to produce more hydrogen with smaller electrolysis without producing lot of heat.

There may well be value to pulsing.  I think that if one buys the Japanese paper premise then a CDI method is the way to get the short duration current pulses that they were proposing.

[ltseung888]

If the osciloscope results are not clear, why not email them to get clarification?  That is the purpose of peer review.

It is quite possible that the team who got funded already read and duplicated the Indian Paper results.  Knowing the commercial environment they work in, I am sure that they will not disclose any information until commercialization.  If they did read the paper; replicated or even improved the result, what is the advantage of announcement.

The only way to make money is to come out with a product first.  It may not be possible to apply for a patent now.  China has huge foreign currency reserve to spend.  They have the "can do" attitude.  Can they surprise the World in this field?  Spending a few million dollars and training a team of PhDs is acceptable even if the result turns out to be a NO.

Scenario D speculation looks better and better now.  I shall revise and polish it more.  It can explain the Indian Paper results and the Stan Meyer water car.  It may even help to further demonstrate the Lead-out or Bring-in Energy theory.

When MarkE cannot see the theoretical significance of the water bottle rocket cooling, I have to doubt his scientific capability.

Can someone explain his diagrams?  It looks like he needs help?  Equations need additional explanations.

[The Boss]

China has huge foreign currency reserve to spend.  They have the "can do" attitude. 

They sure do, you friggin' idiot. They steal technology from the rest of the world.

[MarkE]

If the osciloscope results are not clear, why not email them to get clarification?  That is the purpose of peer review.

Whyd didn't you even notice that the oscilloscope recording contradicted their text?

It is quite possible that the team who got funded already read and duplicated the Indian Paper results.  Knowing the commercial environment they work in, I am sure that they will not disclose any information until commercialization.  If they did read the paper; replicated or even improved the result, what is the advantage of announcement.

It is possible but unlikely that a race of invisible unicorns patrols the skies.  We can speculate all manner of things.  When it comes to extraordinary claims such as the Indians make in their very poorly composed paper strong E.V.I.D.E.N.C.E is required.  They failed to provide even weak evidence.  They failed to even superficially proof read their paper before publication.  You of all people should know: Sloppy work leads out nonsense results.

The only way to make money is to come out with a product first.  It may not be possible to apply for a patent now.  China has huge foreign currency reserve to spend.  They have the "can do" attitude.  Can they surprise the World in this field?  Spending a few million dollars and training a team of PhDs is acceptable even if the result turns out to be a NO.

Taht is yet more pointless speculation.  Try this:  How many times over the years have you personally claimed one scheme or another yields free energy?  How many ever yielded free energy?

Scenario D speculation looks better and better now.  I shall revise and polish it more.  It can explain the Indian Paper results and the Stan Meyer water car.  It may even help to further demonstrate the Lead-out or Bring-in Energy theory.

I hope that your polishing activity includes gathering actual evidence.

When MarkE cannot see the theoretical significance of the water bottle rocket cooling, I have to doubt his scientific capability.

The water bottle analogy has nothing to do with your erroneous math and analysis of the HHO piston scheme you propose.

Can someone explain his diagrams?  It looks like he needs help?  Equations need additional explanations.

Geez Lawrence, no one else seems to have problems with the equations. 

[ltseung888]

 The following is the email I sent to the Author.

E-mail address of author: h2dharmaraj@gmail .com

Subject: Paper on Economical hydrogen production by electrolysis using nano pulsed DC


Dear Mr. Dharmaraj:

Your paper raised much discussion amongst the members in the Overunity.com forum.  One example is reply 159.

http://www.overunity.com/14814/overunity-electrolysis-31-times-more-effective-gas-production-than-with-dc/msg414667/#msg414667

There appeared to be some confusion related to figure 7 of your paper.  Is it possible for you to comment directly on the Forum?


Thank you.

Lawrence Tseung