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

[Marshallin]

Go ahead, try my drive(s) on water. Whatever floats your boat. It would be great if you succeed. Do you wanna pulse by dc or by ac, single phase or 3 phase.

Donut with that ?

The pulser, is an electronic traffic switch of sort, a gated signal from an independent oscillator will in high likelyhood overlap and either cut short or prolonge a gate, an offbeat. This will prevent that in any situation, even on the first pulse, it is very robust.

My 3 phase signal and amplifier, well, you are quite lucky to even witness this. I disclosed my circuit in a manner that is hidden, half hearted divulgation.

So this circuit right there, is quite a devotion, very large. But it works. Its 100% useless for anything other than Stephen Meyers or something that requires 3 phase emulation in 25 khz range.

Its far too large to be of any commercial value, this could all be replaced by a single chip, or 2. It was a doable way, it is atomic and not software so quite fast and robust, snappy.

I would love to collaborate with somebody who has a 18 tube cell arrangement in hexagonal fashion as per Stephen patent, I believe I have an pcb for this circuit

Some sine wave shaping, back in the day I used only old school logic gates, and switch cpacitor filter is a chip that allows for sine wave generation. Then the glitch is filtered.

My amplifier, Efficiency is 50%, but this is just for experimental, flexible, nice waveform, capable of driving capricious and bizarre loads.

There is a complication in the circuitry, as the 7474hc chip needs inversion. the 74cmos doesnt.

You need, +- 22 volts dual rail power supply (control ), and battery or high power smps as main driver. Its a question of ruggedness and quality that I chose dual rail.

Transformer is middle tap, differential transformer. Equal and opposite dc dont effect transformer, so this technique has many advantage, over A/B, , or single ended. Transformer will not saturate.

Yes, there is always wasted DC (heat is still useful), bur that is price to pay for linearisation of mosfet, we are always in conduction mode, signal integrity is goal.

I dont see reason why to try something so complex like it is stephen meyer patent.
If his idea work why you dont make small scale experiment with one cell?

[MarkE]

Go ahead, try my drive(s) on water. Whatever floats your boat. It would be great if you succeed. Do you wanna pulse by dc or by ac, single phase or 3 phase.

Donut with that ?

The pulser, is an electronic traffic switch of sort, a gated signal from an independent oscillator will in high likelyhood overlap and either cut short or prolonge a gate, an offbeat. This will prevent that in any situation, even on the first pulse, it is very robust.

My 3 phase signal and amplifier, well, you are quite lucky to even witness this. I disclosed my circuit in a manner that is hidden, half hearted divulgation.

So this circuit right there, is quite a devotion, very large. But it works. Its 100% useless for anything other than Stephen Meyers or something that requires 3 phase emulation in 25 khz range.

Its far too large to be of any commercial value, this could all be replaced by a single chip, or 2. It was a doable way, it is atomic and not software so quite fast and robust, snappy.

I would love to collaborate with somebody who has a 18 tube cell arrangement in hexagonal fashion as per Stephen patent, I believe I have an pcb for this circuit

Some sine wave shaping, back in the day I used only old school logic gates, and switch cpacitor filter is a chip that allows for sine wave generation. Then the glitch is filtered.

My amplifier, Efficiency is 50%, but this is just for experimental, flexible, nice waveform, capable of driving capricious and bizarre loads.

There is a complication in the circuitry, as the 7474hc chip needs inversion. the 74cmos doesnt.
You need, +- 22 volts dual rail power supply (control ), and battery or high power smps as main driver. Its a question of ruggedness and quality that I chose dual rail.

Transformer is middle tap, differential transformer. Equal and opposite dc dont effect transformer, so this technique has many advantage, over A/B, , or single ended. Transformer will not saturate.

Yes, there is always wasted DC (heat is still useful), bur that is price to pay for linearisation of mosfet, we are always in conduction mode, signal integrity is goal.

74HC74 is a CMOS D FLOP, both Q and /Q come out, and both swing rail to rail.  If you post a pdf of yor schematic and I will see about any recommendations.  I am not a member of all about circuits.

[ltseung888]

Bob with all due respect the implosion is very simple:  1 mole of gas at STP occupies ~22.4 liters.  2 moles of H2, and 1 mole of O2, weighing ~18 grams occupy ~67.2 liters.  When they combust to form 18 grams of liquid water: The water occupies ~18ml.  ~67.18 liters of gas has been removed from the working volume.  The local pressure drops and surrounding gas rushes in to fill the void re-equalizing the pressure.

Dear MarkE,
You have provided the information on the calculation of the amount of Lead-out or Bring-in Energy.  That energy is simply Pressure x Volume(PV).  Pressure is atmospheric Pressure.  Volume is the Volume of Partial Volume Created.  You have now provided the information for that Volume.  Thank you.

If there is IMPLOSION, there is Energy coming from the OUTSIDE.  This energy is considered as Lead-out or Bring-in Energy.
Every Implosion brings in PV units of energy.  The Power is just the number of Implosions per second.  With the theoretical understanding clarified, we can now:
1. Design the Implosion machine to be as efficient as possible.
2. Calculate the amount of Power it can produce.
3. Calculate the mass of Water required.
4. The Good thing about the machine is that the water can be reused.
5. If properly designed, there will be NO emission of Carbon dioxide.  Or no pollution of environment.
6. There will be Global Cooling instead of Global Warming.  We do not need to worry about ice caps melting.
All the HHO or Stan Meyer methods need to be re-examined in this new light.

All top Universities should be informed as soon as possible.  I shall write up a full presentation so that the whole theory is in one place.  Thanks to all who spent years on this Forum and others.  Your efforts have not been in vain.

Divine Revelation?

[MarkE]

Dear MarkE,
You have provided the information on the calculation of the amount of Lead-out or Bring-in Energy.  That energy is simply Pressure x Volume(PV).  Pressure is atmospheric Pressure.  Volume is the Volume of Partial Volume Created.  You have now provided the information for that Volume.  Thank you.

If there is IMPLOSION, there is Energy coming from the OUTSIDE.  This energy is considered as Lead-out or Bring-in Energy.
Every Implosion brings in PV units of energy.  The Power is just the number of Implosions per second.  With the theoretical understanding clarified, we can now:

The assumptions that you seem to be making are really bad.  First you seem to be overlooking that the energy available is slightly less than the energy that it took to compress the surrounding gasses by injecting the H₂ and O₂ gas masses into the confined volume the first place.

1. Design the Implosion machine to be as efficient as possible.

Buy a soup can.

2. Calculate the amount of Power it can produce.

Long term the value is zero.  There is no net energy that can be had from compressing and relaxing a spring, including a gas spring.

3. Calculate the mass of Water required.

It can be any amount you like, because all energy that goes through the system has to be supplied from the outside.

4. The Good thing about the machine is that the water can be reused.

Springs recycle.

5. If properly designed, there will be NO emission of Carbon dioxide.  Or no pollution of environment.

As there is no net work performed, there is also no value.

6. There will be Global Cooling instead of Global Warming.  We do not need to worry about ice caps melting.

Nope, this process doesn't yield any net energy to offset fossil or atomic fuels, or displace the cost of building and maintaining alternative energy generation such as wind and solar.

All the HHO or Stan Meyer methods need to be re-examined in this new light.

No, this is no more workable than any of the many other unworkable free energy schemes that you have promoted over the years.   At least you know Stan Meyer's last name is Meyer and not "Meyers".

All top Universities should be informed as soon as possible.  I shall write up a full presentation so that the whole theory is in one place.  Thanks to all who spent years on this Forum and others.  Your efforts have not been in vain.

Do what you like.  Don't expect this unworkable idea to get a better reception than your other unworkable ideas before it.

Divine Revelation?

No, it's just bad assumptions and flawed logic on your part as many times before.

[ltseung888]

The new understanding using Implosion and Lead-out or Bring-in Energy is in the attached file.

Stan Meyer might have done one thing right accidentally - fed exhaust gas back  increasing Pressure.

Please review and understand your physics before commenting.