Dissociation of the Water Molecule

[triffid]

test

[HeairBear]

Isn't the main goal to use less current and yet produce much more gas than the usual Faraday standard? But, there is a catch. The cell must stay cool even after hours continuous use. I saw Stan Meyer do it and I do believe from my own experiences that he was legit. To fake what he did is pretty hard to do. Making it do what his did is also not as easy without the full details. there is only so much you can do with an alternator and some steel tubes. To do a replication you have to do it exactly as he did which I am currently doing, and here it is, BUT, The cell alone will cost me over 1000 dollars just in materials rough estimate. That's a lot of money for me right now.

What will this prove to me? That I did or did not do it. I don't ever expect to have the resources to run an automobile conveniently from water alone so that is not my goal. If I can run a genset from 10 or 20 watts of power and some water, I got myself a means to survive just about anywhere near water.

Assuming I am successful in the near future beyond my expectations, Do I know what's really going on in my cells? No, I can only speculate until I or any other being on this planet is able to correctly see or whatever it is they do to confirm what is really happening. Sure, I can read all kinds of scientific literature and say this and that fit the description but in reality this is new science and there are no words or scientific standards to go by. The old models won't work beyond what they describe in today's world. Science needs an upgrade!

What I believe is happening with the science of alternative energy for the past 100 years or so is the discovery of a new energy that all it's discoverers have made their own words for. Dark Matter, Negative Energy, Radiant Energy, Orgone Energy, ORME, Free Energy, The GOD Particle, Universal Energy, etc. And then we have the dogma of science that will always rear it's ugly head as long as the world is the way it is today.

Farrah Day, Have you learned anything from this forum useful towards your goals? If not, then why even come back? Are you here to relate what you have learned and offer possible solutions to the same problems we all have at one time or another? Like Science, this forum has a bit of dogma itself, maybe that's a natural phenomena from social web tools used for geeks trying to be scientific and all.

OK, i'll quit blabbering... I'm just so frustrated cuz I can't get my Pirate inspired Earth Battery Joule Thief circuit to work. Damn!

[newbie123]

Isn't the main goal to use less current and yet produce much more gas than the usual Faraday standard?

Wouldn't that be sweet..      It might be possible some day (with LENR type technologies, perhaps), but I've given up on the Stan Meyer concepts...

But, there is a catch. The cell must stay cool even after hours continuous use.  I saw Stan Meyer do it and I do believe from my own experiences that he was legit.

I've seen quite a few Meyer videos, but not one were he  measures the cell's  temperature.  Do you have a link?

To fake what he did is pretty hard to do. Making it do what his did is also not as easy without the full details. there is only so much you can do with an alternator and some steel tubes. To do a replication you have to do it exactly as he did which I am currently doing, and here it is, BUT, The cell alone will cost me over 1000 dollars just in materials rough estimate. That's a lot of money for me right now.

What will this prove to me? That I did or did not do it. I don't ever expect to have the resources to run an automobile conveniently from water alone so that is not my goal. If I can run a genset from 10 or 20 watts of power and some water, I got myself a means to survive just about anywhere near water.

Assuming I am successful in the near future beyond my expectations, Do I know what's really going on in my cells? No, I can only speculate until I or any other being on this planet is able to correctly see or whatever it is they do to confirm what is really happening. Sure, I can read all kinds of scientific literature and say this and that fit the description but in reality this is new science and there are no words or scientific standards to go by. The old models won't work beyond what they describe in today's world. Science needs an upgrade!

This is all speculation though!     If the world had some  working WFCs it wouldn't be, but until then I don't think science needs an upgrade. 

[HeairBear]

What is this? The dastardly duo? Or are you Farrah Day's Side kick? Or maybe your his second personality? You two are so very much alike. Face it, your a troll! Or should I say both of you?

[Farrah Day]

@Jibby

You see me as a negative so-called nay-sayer, whereas in fact I simply have a reserve of healthy skepticism.

I would not be here if I did not think that there were possibilities. I would not be here if I did not think that we might be missing something, and that there actually might be something of real value in all this.  If I was an out-and-out sceptic like you seem to think I am, I would not be interested in the science, would not be wasting my time here, and certainly would not be having this pointless conversation with you right now!

Your article is extremely biased and highlights everything that is wrong with the mentality of the people who write this stuff. These such articles clearly emphasise that the writer has no education in science, no scientific background on which to call upon and no solid foundation on which to build a case - one way or the other.  You have made no attempt whatsoever to sort out the fact from the fiction.

You, in your article have simply assumed that everyone one of these inventions has been legitimate and that every so-called inventor has been genuine, and indeed that everyone of these technologies has been suppressed - all without an ounce of solid evidence or unquestionable proof to back up the claims. It’s pretty pathetic really… isn’t it?

And, I hate to be the one to break it to you, but…  Santas not real!

@Hairbear

New science or not it will conform to certain known laws and principles - it's not magic. My objective is to try to understand what is happening in terms of the science. What reactions are taking place.  Much has yet to be explained - much is conjecture.

How did Meyer achieve high volumes of gas from extremely low currents?

Using high voltage to pull water molecules apart just doesn't cut it. You'll find that Meyer says a great deal, giving the impression that he understood it all, but never once did he provide a balanced chemical equation to explain the reactions or processes involved. I'm not saying he never achieved anything, just that if he did, he was well out of his depth with the science behind it. The Kanzius discovery I believe may well breathe new life into the Meyer technology, in that this is significantly different to standard everyday electrolysis to perhaps go a way to explaining Meyer. Now we just need to explain the Kanzius process!

Oh, I see you're now stooping to petty 'name-calling' too. Join the club, the more the merrier!