The Bob Boyce challenge

[stevie1001]

His equipment generates 100 lpm peak, and will run at
50 lpm comfortably. This will run a smaller car's engine.

I agree on the amount of hydroxy for running small engines, but .......
I seen Bob having a bb cell in his car. He said on his honest manner, that he didnt run 100% on hydroxy. It was more like a booster.....

Again. Bob Boyce doesnt run his car 100% on hydroxy. He doesnt have a miracle toroid setup. Yes his cell can be more efficient then faraday law, but thats not new these days, is it.

I warned you all here. Others warned you.
Its totally up to you if you wanna listen.......go spent your money on yr girl or boyfriends...mucho better investment..

br
Steve
www.ionizationX.com

[CrazyEwok]

lol... low life... right dankie... and if you actually read my post i make no mention of having an interest in his work... asside from the fact he claims OU he is like every other person in the field... Even you beloved Stan ywho you claim should be taken as literal as the dictionary, when mind you alot of people have pointed out  mistakes in a lot of aspects of his work in the hydrogen field... You on the other hand have the arogance to throw down a challenge to him to explain himself to you... who do you think you are??? asside from some boy who is yet to learn that no one in this world owes him nothing and yes you will have to figure stuff out on your own... He says "this" works... you can believe him on his word or go do you own thing. If you had something (wait lets make that anything) that worked and you already have been going around helping out people to attempt to get they replicas working and some snott nose child throws down a challenge to you to explain to them whats going on because they tried once and couldn't for the life of them get it to work the same as somethign you designed and built over years (i'm guessing it was years he took, as i said no intence interest). The answer would be no, and if it was yes you are a sad little boy who has more growing up then you realize. He won't answer your demands. Why would he? because you are the great and powerful coil winder dankie!!! lol if you think he cares keep on with your rant... you'll get no where and bored eventually... lol lowlife...
ROFL

[Farrah Day]

What puzzles me, is that there used be a big prize money advert on this website for anyone achieving overunity.

I see a lot of people claiming over unity, but I've heard of no one that has actually claimed or secured this valuable prize... why?

Has Boycie or anyone else ever approached Hartman with thier OU device?  Or was the OU prize thing just a gimmick in the first place?

Unless you are obviously creating enormous amounts of gas at mere milliamps or similar, claiming overunity is not that easy, especially given the equipment most of us have at hand - it simply is not accurate enough, especially when dealing with ac signals and pulses.

You would need a good laboratory and some very expensive specialised equipment to be sure you had indeed achieved OU. And given that most people do not even understand Faraday's Laws in the first place, so do not have a control baseline for their experiments, most claims are utter fantasy.

Boyce may well be creating enough gas to run a small car engine, but that is not the issue. The issue is how much power is required to do that - is it on-demand?

It's quite simply really, Boycie would have to achieve enough over unity to be able to compensate for normal ICE losses and then could run a car with his on demand wfc - and with claims of many times OU, I don't see where the problem lies. Once he has achieved OU, he would simply have to scale up the process to provide enough gas to comfortably run the engine at all speeds. If it really is OU, then the alternator would be able to provide enough power to keep the battery charged, ie the system is self-sustaining. Just add water and go!

Of course, scaling down, it does not have to be anything as large as a car engine. It could be a very small generator used to prove OU, or something even smaller. It's not rocket science!

Until someone does this, until someone has a self-running wfc, claims of OU are likely greatly exaggerated - maybe intentially, maybe through sheer ignorance. 

Just my thoughts.

[Paul-R]

I seen Bob having a bb cell in his car. He said on his honest manner, that he didnt run 100% on hydroxy. It was more like a booster.....

Yes. He has several systems, and one of them is based on "brute force electrolysis". It is relatively cheap and easy to build, and would act as a booster.

The system for which he is famous does not work on electrolysis. It "fractures" water along the lines of Stan Meyer and John Worrell Keely, using 48.8 Khz, and octave down on that, and a further octave down as well. I saw a demonstration of a similar technology at the UK Free-Energy Conference last year, and the bubbles came from the bulk of the liquid, and not from the plates.

[Farrah Day]

Yes. He has several systems, and one of them is based on "brute force electrolysis". It is relatively cheap and easy to build, and would act as a booster

I'm also puzzled by this.  Why, why, why would someone who claims to have developed super-efficient dissociation of water still, after all this time, be playing around with 'brute force' electrolysis as a booster in his car... it just does not add up!

Who in their right mind would run their car on costly hydrocarbon fuel if they knew how to run it on water... again, it makes no logical sense!

Furthermore, it's all very well to say he 'fractures' water, but what exactly does this mean and exactly how is this achieved at molecular level?

I'm yet to see a balanced chemical equation for the electrochemical reaction that supposedly takes place when 'fracturing' water.

Like it or not, the behaviour of atoms, ions and molecules will conform to a strict set of chemical and physical rules in any given situation.

Hence, there is a logical electrochemical process taking place and a rational explanation... it is not enough to simply accept this happens as if by magic, or worse still, invent some completely implausible explanation that is not based on any true science.