Meyer HV Sync-Wave (HV Water Fracturing)

[Farrah Day]

Hi Dogs

I concur, we are (as was Stan) in relatively unknown territory, so the theory of what we do know does not always line up with the mechanics of it all.  Even todays scientists only have a limited understanding of the properties of water - look at that guy who recently bombarded salt water with RF waves and found he could set it alight!

However, I truly believe that Stan was out of his depth when it came to the theory and science behind what he was doing. This is plainly evident from some of his technical briefs, so a little caution in his interpretations is more than wise. 

Stan always seemed to uneccesarily complicate his briefs with jargon that sounded very technical but often made no sense at all - he tended to talk a lot, but say very little!

His, 'pulsing electrical voltage fields of opposite polarity', is I believe an example of this. What exactly does it mean?  If you apply a +ve pulse across the cell, then one plate will register a +ve condition and the other will be -ve relative to it.  To make the cathode more negative with respect to the anode simply involves increasing the amplitude of the signal - you don't have to pull at both ends! 

Here's an analogy: Think of it as an elastic band stretching to breaking point. It doesn't matter whether you are holding it between two fingers and evenly stretching it apart, or simply using one finger with the other end of the elastic band attatched firmly to a fixed point - the result is the same.  This is where I'm failing to see any reason for Stan's comment, or your interpretation of it.  But, perhaps I'm missing something.

The other thing about any ion current travelling through a liquid is that it is by it's very nature much less efficient than electron flow.  Electron flow is near instant, like pushing a row of touching ballbearings; the moment you push one end, the ballbearing at the other end will move.  This is because electrons hop from one very closely spaced atom to the next. In the liquid, the electrons don't hop from one atom to the next, which means that ions have to carry the charge all the way themselves, during which they are jostled about and slowed by the interaction of all the constantly moving atoms in the liquid. My analogy for this: An old lady, heavily laden with shoping bags trying to negotiate her way through the bustling town centre on a busy market day.

There must quickly be a point at which many electron induced charges are lining up on the electrodes, impatiently waiting for the old lady to finally get there to unladen her shopping bags! It would therefore, also seem logical that the longer it goes on the more charges will build up on the electrodes.  Somewhere in all this the answers are there are waiting for us.

Keep up the interesting work.

[allcanadian]

@Farrah Day

His, 'pulsing electrical voltage fields of opposite polarity', is I believe an example of this. What exactly does it mean?  If you apply a +ve pulse across the cell, then one plate will register a +ve condition and the other will be -ve relative to it.  To make the cathode more negative with respect to the anode simply involves increasing the amplitude of the signal - you don't have to pull at both ends!

I am not sure this is what stan meant, I posted some scopeshots which explain my thoughts in this respect.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=3457.1260

If your cell is considered a capacitor there is no -ve in it, there is only a changing potential +ve, a voltage drop. What if you could "pull" at both ends? That is a very interesting proposition, there has been speculation that if two circuits were to "pull" at the resonant frequency of each resective molecule (02 -- H2) the efficiency would be very high. Personally I would like to see what happens when two inductive discharges are forced to move in opposite directions away from each other, with a cell in the middle. I have all the components ready maybe I will rig a cell and get back to you.

[Farrah Day]

Interesting scope shots AC.

Not sure what you mean by 'no -ve in it', as the electrons are the physical -ve part of the equation, the +ve is only effectively a shortage or depleted area of electrons.  And as you say a +ve pulse indicates only that the polarity is not reversed. I'm still mystified by the 'pulling at both ends' idea - can't get my head around this, but hey, I'm as interested as anybody to see any forthcoming results. 

All the electronics aside, one fundamental and underlying aspect of the whole gas production thing that many people seem not to consider or simply ignore, is the reaction that must take place for gas to be produced.  This is something that has always concerned me.  Pulsing 2 Megavolts across a wfc is all well and good, but we know that to ionise and produce gas, water molecules need to react with electrons.  So if we are trying our damndest to eliminate electron flow, the water can't ionise - hence no gas!

It is all very well Stan stating that this novel way of producing H2 and O2 efficiently does not involve ionisation, but if not... then what?  We still have equations to balance and atomic laws to consider. We pull water apart without the interaction of ions and what do we get?  A H2 molecule and a O++ ion or an O atom and two H- ions?  So, we do manage to pull them apart and what is the first thing that they are going to want to do once out of the electrostatic field... yes, restabilise as water.

A lot of these questions bother me, because if we are getting true O2 and H2, then voltage alone cannot achieve this - surely we need the electron.

[HeairBear]

So, how can you get ionization without current? Mechanically?


HairBear

[zerotensor]

@Hairbear:

You do it with a large, short-lived electric field.