ZPDM

Thanks for sharing this. I have not reviewed your appended material yet and look forward to doing so. It may be for all the questions the answers is look at the drop box material. However, 1) when you are referring to CoP are you speaking of electrical joules in compared to caloric heat joules out from combustion of H2 and/or hydroxy? 2) I am guessing you are aiming for a specific pulse rate or frequency perhaps looking to utilize a resonant frequency of the O-H bond? 3) Are you using pulses or sine waves or other? 4) Are you using a direct spike or wave from from a DC power source or a "radiant" spike off an inductor? 5) Are you using special plate material or plate preparation? 6) Are you using KoH or a different electrolyte? Sorry to be a Gatlin Gun, especially when I have not yet reviewed the provided material. Am looking forward to this.

Tom C's comment is cogent and apropos. Who is it that started this? Let's all go to the AG and say "I bought a free energy device and it didn't work, what are you going to do for me?" That'll work out well. I don't want to focus on some dispute with whoever this guy Rick is and JB. JB gave us a lot to look at and enjoy learning from, hopefully honours him to continue to take a look at it and not focus on some one who apparently wanted to play monkey business with John's work.

Haven't done more on the above project at this time but thought I would pass along one small electrolysis observation, it may be nothing, so much of this sort of stuff is just hard for me to quantify. Perhaps I should make a video but is seems too much work at the moment. If you have +/- electrolysis plates and you replace the + with a ribbon, most of the negative plate still makes bubbles. Again, I can't at the moment formally quantify it, but there is a field effect from the ribbon which covers much of the negative plate. The problem I have, and again this is just eyeballing it I don't have a spectrometer, there seems to be more bubbles off the negative plate than the positive. It doesn't look stoichametrically (there's a three dollar word) balanced. I tried to say well the pos. plate/ribbon splits into H and O then recombines into water because it has only a small place to go to, but well ... that doesn't make any sense. There seems to be more bubbles off the negative plate than the positive ribbon, I don't know how it would balance. Anyhow, at first glance it appears if you wish to bias production towards H you can just make the + plate smaller. Haven't looked at the obverse yet but that may also hold true, and as this is quite recent may take a few days to confirm

I've done a decent amount with this at this point. I have a video which I will try to post over the week-end of charging plates radiantly in water, disconnecting power then using the residual plates' voltage as power and radiantly charging a cap. Using say a 6V input I was able to get a cap to say 7-8V this way. The plates would charge to say 4V plate - plate difference and settle at maybe 1.2V disconnected and there were enough amps there to run a coil briefly. A few things here, 1) I don't know how radiantly charging plates compares to standard electrolysis approaches, I have heard it may be better (Patrick Kelly) but I am not electrolysis guy at least at this time and I have two plates of stainless steel in a gallon water jug, so I don't know. 2) Will say I am running 10-12 watts through a 3055, no heatsink and it is cool as a cucumber, left the plates disconnected by accident and fried the transistor in a second. Go figure! 3) Need to look at what happens when electrolyte is introduced (I'm thinking sodium ascorbate ), will the residual plate voltage behave in similar manner, I'm optimistic because I imagine caps and SLABS don't have tap water but haven't looked at that yet.

Surprisingly to me, I did manage to automate this process. Will look to make a vid but in Arduino there were used two different FOR loops. First to pulse the plates from the coil say 5000 times, then a second trigger flipping to the second FOR loop triggering the coil say 5000 times from the residual voltage of plates. Additionally 3-4 other lines need to be made/broken as you switch between the two states. I used separate Arduino triggers for each make/break line and found I needed to optoisolate them for it to work, but eventually it did. Once, again to my surprise, I got it to work, I backed off from it, I was just happy I made the thing work. Real rough sort of eyeballing it I think I was getting maybe 50-75% energy back. After letting this simmer a week or so I think I will return to it over the next few weeks. If the thing behaves similarly with electrolyte present, there is a possibility, though there are lots of variables still not evaluated, that this is a decent means of electrolysis.

Will try and post the video of where I first got interested over the week-end and perhaps if I get the automated version running again can post further video/schematics/Arduino programs if any wish.

Been looking a little at electrolysis, limited as I sometimes to often am by a lack of engineering background. This is a small observation, not likely new to the elders and grand poobahs of FE/electrolysis but I've thought about it for awhile and have decided yes it is weird. If you take two plates in water say stainless steel and charge them radiantly or otw for HHO production, when you disconnect the power source the plates retain a residual voltage. It is persistent and reminds me of what you see when caps rebound after being charged then discharged.

I'll mention a couple things about it, after running two plates with say a 4V plate to plate difference a residual voltage of maybe 0.2 - 0.3 volts persisted. I shorted the plates, when I removed the short the voltage returned, I hooked a cap up, it went to 0.2V and the plates retained the voltage. One reason I find it interesting is that I have seen this voltage persist overnight and the plates were not in the water if I recall, the effect seems to be in the plates and is brought out in the water. I think this occurrence, might bet a glass of water, is related to Ibepointless2's captret, I suspect it is related to caps rebounding, and is possibly related to some of the charging phenomena with pulsed radiant to SLABs. I haven't been real good at staying on topic historically and don't know if I will do more with this but the obvious, I guess, questions if I look further are 1) how long does it take to establish this "electret" effect in the plates, 1/2 hour, 5 seconds? 2) How long does it persist when repeatedly discharged, 30 seconds, 12 hours? It may even relate to earth batteries and ley lines as I think and write. 3) can I use an inductor to get the 0.2 - 0.3V to 2 or 3 volts?. 4) can I get the residual voltage up to 0.5 - 1V?

Will try and take at least a quick look this week.

Bung EE,

Sorry for being off topic, it is often my wont even on threads I start myself! This looks like a fascinating development and I hope it has great utility. You know to get to the bottom of this someone should replicate it. I don't know if bench research or more academic work is your forte, but just out of curiosity have you started on a build of the Dumas spheres? I find the idea complicated, if you are putting in effort on this please help the dullards like myself along.

Tom,

With deference to Bung EE as with only a glance I don't know what might be going on in the referenced experiment. I'll say I haven't forgotten vacuum distillation it is third on my list. Well you said what it was, so if it does work, it is simple and big. I am waiting this week on a printed rotor. My goal will be can you send energy from a pick-up coil back to the run battery. I realize with great effort as I think is detailed in some write-ups you can "back pop" the radiant. I don't care, I am getting a little more torque from the "timing mechanism" and wonder if I can "back-pop" a pick-up coil to the run battery. I got what I think is a pretty unique idea for this, (actually I mentioned this in min2oly's request for cap dumps) don't know if it will work, but if you name it for me I will be annoyed. As for 2, a small engine mechanic a few towns over further out in the sticks wants to look at lithium as a gasoline additive some week-end this summer. Despite my earlier results will have to wait and see what results. I do know though I am approaching that idea in a reasonable way, not that there is any direct commercial potential in such a thing, but, if perchance, ... Yabba Dabba do.

Hi guyzzemf,

First off I defer to Bung-ee if I should go elsewhere with this as it is tangential to the original thread. That said I want to keep talking about this because if there aren't errors I think the concept is useful. Concerning your points

1) the goal is not to cook an egg, indeed if you had a partial vacuum such that water boiled at 80-90F you aren't going to cook that egg no matter how long you boil it. I completely agree that the steam coming off water in a partial vacuum at 80F won't have near the same energy as one at 1 atm and 212F If you wanted to turn a turbine with it, not so good, in fact if I recall they super heat the steam in the big coal and nuclear fired plants to 1000F or 1000C as this highly energetic steam is more efficient.

2) Vacuum distillation won't make the water safe or purify it, I disagree. The viruses, bacteria, particulates, minerals will not turn to vapour at the lower pressure, the differential in boiling points remains you have just moved the goal posts. In fact, if the skimming I have been doing has not been misunderstood vacuum distillation is used for difficult fractional distillation cases, i.e. ones where you want to separate two liquids with similar boiling points. I do agree that you won't get any heat inactivation of viruses/bacteria, it shouldn't matter.

3) There is no net energy savings with vacuum distillation, I believe there is with the approach I detailed. The commenter on the science forum rightly points out that if you convert water to steam it will occupy more space (increasing pressure in the closed container) and as more and more steam is created more and more must be pumped out to maintain the vacuum, hence no energy savings. However that is not the approach I outlined. Here it is again, consider a closed container partially evacuated to where water boils at 85F. It is on the roof of car in direct sunlight and so at 100F, the water vaporizes and rises a foot to a first collection chamber that is in the shade and so at the ambient temperature of 70F. It recondenses to liquid in the collection chamber and is allowed to drip off to a second collection container also at 70F. Likewise the youtube video does not have any collection chamber where steam condenses. So no, you don't need to keep drawing off the steam to maintain the vacuum.

Here is a video of a "toy" called a hand boiler, this shows a similar concept without the second collection chamber. In a hand boiler a volatile organic I think usually an alcohol is used that has boiling point of maybe 80F, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYB_EHfX89I Now that I look at this video again, I have to admit you are right that there is no distillation going on here, the dye should have stayed in the bottom chamber. Then again if you are moving that liquid in the hand boiler to the upper chamber without even needing to fully vaporize it that opens a different kettle of fish. Still maybe I missing something with trying to use this to distill water cost effectively. Long and short I need to pick up the vacuum distillation kit I was referred to, take some salt water and see if I get fresh water with minimal heat and a partial vacuum.

Thx Tom, That is just what I was talking about and now I have something else I would like to buy at some point. Not to stay so far on a tangent but just for this post let's crunch some numbers because I am getting some seemingly strange results that perhaps someone would confirm or refine.

Lets take a 5 gallon drum of water. How much energy is saved if one completely boils off this 5 gallons at 40C instead of 100C.

1 gallon =~ 3780 grams, 5 gallons = 18900 grams.
1 calorie is defined as energy required to raise one gram of water one degree Celsius.
100-40=60 60*18900 = 1,134,000 calories
1 calorie = 4.2 joules so 4,762,800 joules


I am pretty amazed that the difference is 4.8 megajoules but don't see any other way to calculate it. So this is the number we have to play around with to create the vacuum. How much energy is needed to create the vacuum? That I've found to be a much tougher question. First what is the volume we need to evacuate, well we need another 5 gallon collection container, some piping and some air space above the first container so let's say ten gallons. 10 gallons is also 0.038 cubic meters. So how much energy is required to create a 1 psi vacuum in 0.038 cubic meters? While I need help here I did find two sources from a search of "energy required to create a vacuum" 1) http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=732567 JBriggs gave the following equation

W = V * ( Pamb - Pnew ) + V * Pnew * ln(Pnew/Pamb)
plugging the numbers in

0.038 *(101,325 - 6895) + 0.038*6895*ln(6895/101325) = 3588 + 262*(-2.68) = 2,883 joules

there is a second discussion here http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=526188 xts declares that it would take 18Kw to create a one torr vacuum for 7 cubic meters we would need a slightly lesser vacuum in 0.038 cubic meters. Hence (0.038/7)*18Kw= 99 watts. A joule is also a watt/sec, so these numbers are quite a bit different and quite a bit less than 5 megajoules, don't know if either is correct but I will say this, I have a car tire inflator that plugs into the car DC outlet, it will pump up a tire in 5 minutes or less what would it draw, maybe 50 watts? It is pumping from ambient of 15 psi to 32 or more psi. 5*60*50 = 150,000 joules, still less than 4,800,000 joules.

I can't definitively nail it down, but I suspect it takes one percent or less of the energy saved to create the vacuum condition necessary to boil water at 40C vs 100C, the rest would be pure energy savings. If my above calculations are not way the heck off, vacuum distillation should be on every boat, in every shore town in the world. Of course something else funny is going on whenever you have a liquid turning to steam at near ambient temperature, who knows maybe that is why no large company develops it commercially.

Okay some revisions, blood boils at around 64,000 feet (Armstrong limit) and this is 0.906 psi versus 14.69 psi at sea level, more of a vacuum then originally stated. So to boil water at 90F might require a vacuum of say 1-1.5 psi. Lest (dangerous word) you think I was joking about doing this with a syringe here (http://www.avs.org/AVS/files/10/1043...1698d8c382.pdf) is a pdf of a syringe created vacuum with a flapper valve that can create a vacuum, as noted on the last page of the write-up, of 0.8 psi. That would more than do it, could you imagine what might be done with a modified bicycle pump? Again, open to critiques and/or let's start making potable water!

Alright, I wasn't going to mention this because I think of lots of stuff and sometimes I look at it the next day and say "there you go thinking again" and I have zero data of my own, but leaving aside the complexity of the possibly valid Dumas approach let me ask what would happen to you if you flew in an oxygenated, unpressurized plane at, I have no idea, 200,000 feet, your blood would boil. It takes about, from memory a one third decrease in atmospheric pressure for water to boil at near room temperature. This is not at all difficult, trivial, to achieve. I had thought about this and I believe posted about this as a way to improve the efficiency of steam engines (making them like "Organic Rankine Cycle" engines without the volatile liquid). Well I finally made it to church a while back and my mind wandered and I thought if I was on a desert island I could use this to distill saltwater.

All you would need is a syringe to decrease atmospheric pressure. (Tesla had some sort of steam diode thing that he patented but I can't find it now and you wouldn't need this as a continuous process). Put salt water in a closed container, have a connected syringe or the like draw off air until the pressure was 2/3 atm or where the water boiled at say 90F. Put a match to the container, or a magnifying glass or one's hands. Let the steam rise up a foot to a second container at ambient 72F temperature with a passage to a lower collection chamber.

I'm not happy to be wrong but I am happy to know the truth and I can't do as much experimenting as I would like, someone check the numbers and or generate some data. I write this because it is about clean water, well over a million people die from diarrheal illnesses each year most of them children, this might even fit in a back pack. Why wouldn't this work?!?!

Alright, here's an open source over-unity "device" that no one talks about. Perhaps I'm wrong, but what is your explanation? So, how about a tornado? What is the input energy source? The tornado is too small for it to be from the Coriolis effect, is it a few degrees of temperature differential? Ah, it is the 10's to hundreds of millibars of pressure differential between the interior and exterior. Airlines know just how difficult it is to create a modest atmospheric pressure differential. The input energy to create this partial vacuum then must account for a tornado's propensity to rip trees from the ground and destroy buildings in mile long swathes. What and where exactly is the input energy and is it (including entropy losses) equal to the output energy? Makes little sense to me.