Overunity.com Archives is Temporarily on Read Mode Only!



Free Energy will change the World - Free Energy will stop Climate Change - Free Energy will give us hope
and we will not surrender until free energy will be enabled all over the world, to power planes, cars, ships and trains.
Free energy will help the poor to become independent of needing expensive fuels.
So all in all Free energy will bring far more peace to the world than any other invention has already brought to the world.
Those beautiful words were written by Stefan Hartmann/Owner/Admin at overunity.com
Unfortunately now, Stefan Hartmann is very ill and He needs our help
Stefan wanted that I have all these massive data to get it back online
even being as ill as Stefan is, he transferred all databases and folders
that without his help, this Forum Archives would have never been published here
so, please, as the Webmaster and Creator of these Archives, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above.
You can visit us or register at my main site at:
Overunity Machines Forum



Stan Meyer's "Non-Electrolysis" method

Started by HeairBear, December 22, 2007, 03:13:36 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

HeairBear

I know what you are thinking. I have posted in the wrong topic and that this should be moved to the Electrolysis section. What this post concerns, though, is what I think Stan was hiding or leaving out of his patents, videos, or any documentation that I have found, is a piezoelectric element inside the negative cathode tube or plate. So, in essence, the inner tube would be an electrode/transducer. I am currently researching piezoelectric materials for use in my next experiments in hopes of confirming my gut feeling that Stan used cavitation and electrolysis to get the amounts of gasses he was producing.

A small reference I found in US patent 4798661, FIG. 7. Described as... "a crossectional perspective of a multiple layer sandwich resistive element for inhibiting electron leakage". He also states... "In this embodiment of the current inhibitor connected to the inner plate having the negative voltage applied thereto, comprises a stainless steel sandwich with a resistive material therebetween. The stainless steel is a poor conductive material and hence will restrict to some extent the electron flow. Other poor conductive material may be used in lieu of the stainless steel. The electron inhibitor is connected in the same manner as resistor, between the inner plate having the negative potential connected to it and ground. The resistive value of the electron inhibitor is chosen empirically to a closest value, thereafter the total value of the resistance is fine tuned by the resistor connected serially between the inner plate and ground. To alter the resistive value of the electron inhibitor, the resistive material comprising a mixture with a binder is altered in the percentage of resistive material to binder."

What an odd way to add resistance, don't you think? He calls it an "electron inhibitor" and not a resistor. This puzzled me for a long time until I learned the fundamentals of sonochemistry and cavitation. In a nutshell, we can vibrate liquids at ultrasonic speeds to get a desired affect only achievable at certain frequencies and/or multiples of frequencies such as harmonics and polyphonic tones. Cavitation is partly the fracturing of the molecules caused by the vibration. Today we use this technology in devices such as ultrasonic cleaners and chemical reaction chambers for mixing and increasing chemical reactions up to a million fold.

Now, the question next for me was, "What is electrolysis?".

e?lec?trol?y?sis [i-lek-trol-uh-sis, ee-lek-] ?noun

Physical Chemistry. the passage of an electric current through an electrolyte with subsequent migration of positively and negatively charged ions to the negative and positive electrodes.

Well, if it's well known that cavitation can increase chemical reactions up to a million fold, then, why not electrolysis? It's a chemical reaction. Let's look into this a little further...

A piezoelectric ceramic element exposed to an alternating electric field changes dimensions cyclically, at the frequency of the field. The frequency at which the element vibrates most readily in response to the electrical input, and most efficiently converts the electrical energy input into mechanical energy -- the  resonance frequency -- is determined by the composition of the ceramic material and by the shape and volume of the element.

As the frequency of cycling is increased, the element's oscillations first approach a frequency at which impedance is minimum (maximum admittance). This frequency also is the resonance frequency. As the frequency is further increased, impedance increases to a maximum (minimum admittance), which also is the anti-resonance frequency. These frequencies are determined by experiment


This explains why Stan was getting parallel LC resonance characteristics out of a series LC circuit. In his earlier designs, the use of the VIC was not yet implemented which proves the chokes are not as important as some believe. It's the old trick of watching the right hand while the left hand does the work unseen. He wants you to think it's all in the circuitry when in fact it's in the cell.

When ever you see a video of Stan describing how the "Water Fuel Cell" worked, he would always say: "Let the voltage do the work." Any of you out there whom have experimented with electrolysis of water painstakingly know that more voltage causes more current to flow. It's a catch22. By simply utilizing piezoelectric materials in a proper configuration, we can achieve, very easily, high levels of voltage and still only consume about 500 mA.

Having all this and more in mind, I am at the point of devising a inexpensive and readily available material for use as a piezoelectric material. I have found many pre-manufactured elements but what I am truly looking for is what Stan may have used with his so called binder. One possibility would be to use corona dope mixed with quartz powder. I know very little in this area, so, please, if you have any pertinent information about how to go about building my own piezoelectric material, let me know. Quartz seems to be the best choice for it's properties and low cost. It would also seem rather difficult to cut a perfect fit solid crystal into a tube.

enough writing for now, back to research. Thanx for reading my post and any comments you might have. Cheers!
When I hear of Shoedinger's Cat, I reach for my gun. - Stephen Hawking

AhuraMazda

Heairbear
It is a good idea to mix conventional electrolysis with ultrasonics.

I found a couple nearly relavant links and look forward to your results.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0oNZcLyCR_Q
http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/klu/jmsc/1998/00000033/00000011/00339017;jsessionid=1ep9zh54lqhet.alexandra

hansvonlieven

Just of the top of my head,

As to the material Stan might have used only three come readily to mind, Cane sugar, Rochelle salt and zinc oxide. All three are piezoelectric. Since cane sugar and Rochelle salt are water soluble that really only leaves zinc oxide as a likely contender.

Hope this helps

Hans von Lieven
When all is said and done, more is said than done.     Groucho Marx

oystla

Interesting idea

Have a look at wikipedia on piezo electricity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piezoelectricity#High_voltage_and_power_sources

A lot of interesting info, like electric lighters using piezo electric crystal to obtain high voltages and resulting sparks....


HeairBear

Thank you Hans and oystla!

oystla, you are the first person to actually read something about this technology and comment on it to me. I have been talking to others about it and they all think I'm out of my mind. Or, at least that is the impression I get. You made my day with that link. Thank you!

Hans, do you have any more info on zinc oxide? I've looked around and didn't find much and I thought maybe you might have a secret stash of links to some good reading.

Thanks again and have a great day!
When I hear of Shoedinger's Cat, I reach for my gun. - Stephen Hawking