HydroMeyers Vic

[dutchy1966]

Read my last post to "K".  (VIC coil can rest in peace.)

Yes, you get two pulses, one positive and one negative - from one input pulse.   There-in lies a secret, by the way.
(It sounded like he meant two of the same polarity.)

================================

Hi,

I find it quite strange that you don't know about the mentioned "pulse doubler" in the VIC. Dont tell me it isn't there because that would only proof beyond any doubt you didn't read the tech brief (very well)
Makes me think you're not so up to scratch about Meyers as you want ppl to believe.....

D.

[Grumpy]

Hi,

I find it quite strange that you don't know about the mentioned "pulse doubler" in the VIC. Dont tell me it isn't there because that would only proof beyond any doubt you didn't read the tech brief (very well)
Makes me think you're not so up to scratch about Meyers as you want ppl to believe.....

D.

a text search of the brief will show you that Meyer never used the term "pulse doubler".  Meyer uses the term "pulse frequency doubler" which is a hell of a lot different than a "pulse doubler".  So, all he is saying is that the pulse is shorter when it comes out.  If that is so, then why is T3 the same or is this also compressed and he forgot to mention that?

Also, the term "pulse frequency doubler" is not in reference to the VIC Matrix Coil, but to another version of the VIC coil.

So, looks like you are the one that didn't read it well... 

[Grumpy]

Hey Dutchy,

While I have been working closely with Grumpy on various things, I don't even agree with his explanation of Meyer's original tube cell process. Having said that, I have been working on Meyer's last process and Grumpy has been super helpful and knows quite a bit about it.

EDIT - I think what Grumpy is saying is that on the primary transformer, which this VIC Choke is not, there is a B+ and a B- side which 90% of the people don't seem to get and Grumpy is correct. As the positive side goes higher, the negative side goes lower.

Recently Grumpy uploaded a PDF that spelled out that VIC to the point of even mentioning that "some water cars worked this way" and not all the inductors collapse at the same time. It taught the basic process.

I just felt that was worth mentioning because anyone interested in the VIC would want to read it and anyone interested in Meyer's final version of the technology would want to know some of the stuff Grumpy does. It is one thing to miss something or make a mistake, quite another to intentionally attempt to deceive others for attention or money. That ain't Grumpy.

Several chemistry text support my explanation of the tube cell as do un-published experiments of a couple of individuals.

We have all contributed to making the deciphering of Meyer's work more difficult by filling in the blanks with "assumptions" and "presumptions".

Yes, winding coils "that way" makes the flux collapse from the end not the outer diameter, but I don't know shit so don't listen to me.

Which pdf was that? (I can't remember the name and now I can't find it.)

EDIT:

Look at the evolution of the VIC - the different approaches.  In the early version he needed and adjustable choke, but only on the ground side and a diode on the positive side - you get unipolar pulses.

Look at WFC 427 (figure 8-10) - he finally center-tapped the secondary - took him long enough - but he still has the blocking diode (two of them now - opposite directions) and he still tuned the negative choke.

[dutchy1966]

a text search of the brief will show you that Meyer never used the term "pulse doubler".  Meyer uses the term "pulse frequency doubler" which is a hell of a lot different than a "pulse doubler".  So, all he is saying is that the pulse is shorter when it comes out.  If that is so, then why is T3 the same or is this also compressed and he forgot to mention that?

Also, the term "pulse frequency doubler" is not in reference to the VIC Matrix Coil, but to another version of the VIC coil.

So, looks like you are the one that didn't read it well... 

Hi Grumpy and Buzz,

It should read pulse frequency doubler. I'll give you that.... It is what i meant, but you are right pulse doubler is not the same as pulse frequency doubler.
That corrected, I still think we are talking about the VIC matrix circuit, seeing as the "pulse frequency doubler is referenced in the tech brief section 7 (=VIC Matrix circuit)
As I understand it T1 is the pulse on time, T2 the pulse off time and T3 the gating. Then at the output during T2 there will be another pulse from the collapsing of the magnetic field of the choke coil. That is where the pulse frequency doubling comes from. So I dont understand what you mean when you say "that the pulse is shorter".

There is basically two types of VICs mentioned in tech brief section 7 as far as i can see. There is the earlier one with the copper wrapped (tuned) coils and it uses the step charging to promote the electron bounce effect.
Then there is the better version with the bifilar resistive choke coils (and resistive secondary!) that uses simultaneous opposite polarity pulses on the cell.

It's all spelled out on pages 7-1 and 7-2 of the tech brief. I can't make much else of it.....

Let's try not to get in an pointless "I know it better debate" and turn this topic into something constructive again.

regards Dutchy

[Grumpy]

So I dont understand what you mean when you say "that the pulse is shorter".

when you increase the frequency, double it for example, you decrease the wavelength and the pulse is shorter