Steve

It is nice and it is different.
The question now is if this methode of powerdistribution is more efficient or not.
And is it usefull for making hydrogen out of water?

Just my 2 cents....


Steve

Hi folks,

Here is a video of a person showing some interesting stuff.
He let us believe that he gets OU.
What do you  all think of this?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Xefg-EfC4Q[/youtube]

Amp go down on the prim and power goes up on ther secondairy....Strange....explanable?

Steve

Stan doesn't use a cathode then, neither emit electrons 

Hi Donald,

I know that there are 2 camps fighting to prove that they know what Stan did..
The non amps and the amps researchers.
Can you explain then to me the follow testresults?

Steve

People just need to realize this is not a competition between experimenters/inventors...instead it's a collaboration. Fear not to be wrong...as Thomas Edison said "I didn't fail 1000 times...I found 1000 ways NOT to make a light bulb"

Well, i agree, Radiant. It absolute not a competition. Collaboration is needed. Thats why we need to teach each other. The last thing i have is fear to be wrong. I will admitte directly if i am wrong. I trully do not have such feelings.
Thats why i always say, come and prove otherwise. Teach us. I tell you where I stand. You tell where you stand and i hope we can go from there.
At the end, we must show some prove to oneother, is it.

Steve

Quote

Hi radiant,

I had email contact with Naudin at the time that he published that wfc test.
He was convinced that he was right and that he wanted to go for a fully insulated tube.
As you can see at his video and drawing, he used tape to cover his tube.
I tried that too and it became clear to me that there where amps leaking.
That would also be the reason why he didnt publishe his promised new setup.
He should have found out what happend.
His theory is nice, btw. It would be great if someone was able to prove its working.

Steve

Well, Steve.....
Have you noticed he has published NOTHING NEW!!!....Not one thing since that WFC test!!!!!! You honestly think that's because he was wrong?? I rest my case


P.S.
I belonged to a skype water fuel chat group...and, I purposed the insulated electrode WAY before Naudin ever did it. I had VERY heated discussions with the head of Energeticforum (before there was an energeticforum) over this exact issue....it ended with him saying "I said this to begin with"
Then a couple months later Naudin tried it out...it is by no way HIS theory...neither is it MINE...it was my interpretation of various things Stan said + my own understanding of how you get voltage to do work w/o amp leakage.
As for your replication of Naudin and "knowing" it was leaking amps....your setup was NOT Naudins...and, he definitely showed an increase in capacitor action...if it leaked, that's fine....it still shows step charging and increase of overall charge. However, even Naudin's replication is not perfect...he only reached 1Kv...Stan notes around 16-20Kv!!

Its not just me, but i also work with friends that replicated the Naudin work. Same conclusion.
I do not wanna say that Naudin was not ok in trying. He came very far. Showd nice stuff. But with a trully fully insulated tubeset, i havent seen any bubble and also the people i work with couldnt make any bubbles.
Of course we seen hv and capacitance and resonance.
Radiant, if you want to prove a point, then show us here a working setup. Many here want to see that. Thats  the only thing i ask.
Too many theory here on the forum. Almost nobody showing any prove.

Dankie: i just send you a PM.

Steve

Here is a cool video .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRMEJdmixKA&feature=channel_page

nice video, btw

@Steve
It's no myth, and, is clearly laid out for all to read and understand...even Naudin notes the adiabatic flow of charge...see also adiabatic ionization
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adiabatic_ionization

Hi radiant,

I had email contact with Naudin at the time that he published that wfc test.
He was convinced that he was right and that he wanted to go for a fully insulated tube.
As you can see at his video and drawing, he used tape to cover his tube.
I tried that too and it became clear to me that there where amps leaking.
That would also be the reason why he didnt publishe his promised new setup.
He should have found out what happend.
His theory is nice, btw. It would be great if someone was able to prove its working.

Steve

Steve , stop being so negative in my threads .

Here is a cool video .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRMEJdmixKA&feature=channel_page

Dankie, there is a difference between negative and realistic.
As long as nobody show otherwise, then maybe you must give it a thought that my advise, based on tests, is right.....
As what you concern, I didnt seen any test experience advice coming from your part.
You  sell wire and a PWM. No indication that you run a wfc or engine from your part.
I love thinking out of the box. Theory is nice. Now make the next step in the proces and that is make it practical, make it, prove it, tell everybody about it.
Some of us are doing that. You can name them all here. Thats why many came to this forum, because Brian and I showed the world what we where doing. Many followed. And i appriciate them all. They spend time and money, like i did/do.
I hope you start building a wfc......add the coil you like. If you can prove your right, then you will get it. No problemo.

Steve

Quote

Accoording to the knowledge i have, you will have a discharge. That discharge will happen very quick. Meaning: lots of amps  in a short periode. With a bifcoil you can slow the discharge, but it will happen..

if this is true then why would stan state on video that with a 15 second on put time he could continue to produce gas for 94 seconds during what he called off put time...

how is a capacitor made?  with a dielectic between parellel conductors right? ..

Quote

At the end you talk about a charge in the chokes/coils transformer. Well, what happens when the power is off? What happens to the charge in those nice coils?

i think during the 94 second  off put time he is still gating negative side of the primary where  the negative choke is also conected  (not to secondary)  and he is using common ground to dicharge the transformer in a gated manner.. so you are still drumming the water even when powers off. then when it needs to charge up again the postive side of primary turns back on. and adds the analog pulse.. analog is the variable amplitude..

think really hard on this senario.. the choke wire, lets say both are exactly 500 ft.. now think of that wire not as a line/string but pretend you are the size of a flea standing next to 26awg..  the fleas perspective in a size to size ratio.. the wire is like 3 foot tall and 5 miles long....to the flea that wire has great volume... what if that wire was a air tank and wasnt solid?  to the flea that tank can hold alot of volume under preasure..  so if we can except that wire has volume like a air tank you start to see potentials a little diff..

now what if one tank (wire) is a little longer (bigger) then the other? ask your self what happens to 2 air tanks if one is bigger then the other? well the bigger tank will require more air then the other to have the same pressure.. you could have the 2 air tanks (wire) hooked to 2 different pumps (emf) of the same force the smaller tank will peak quicker then the bigger tank (wire)  thats why they are of same length but there is still more to it for understanding why the charge stays on the core and not in the water..

now why does it.. well think of the 2 tanks again.. these tanks are wound side by side.. the positve having a diode is pulling electrons out and sending/manifesting/ deflecting  them into the secondary... so the chokes charge is  pos potential (vaccum/ positive polarity)
the negative choke potential (pressure negative polarity)  since the 2 wire are the same length they will charge at a even pace.. the negative is charging it self through ground, ,and is pulling electrons in.. the rising polarity of positive is causing negative to induct the charge into itself..  when it is charged (the transformer not the cell)  the charge does not leave because the 2 wires are the same length,  they are sitting right next to each other and have opposite charges in them.. that are happy on the core,...  so what happens if you introduce the neg choke to a gated ground? will it oscillate and discharge slowly drumming the cell with voltage?

im not saying im right on this but i feel like im close


stans drawing i think can be missleading.. to simple..

I do not have all the answers, Outlaw,
But have you watched a wfc and see what happend when you take the power from it? Indead, it keeps on going producing for a long time. Maybe that is the fenomenon Stan is talking about.

Your theory about a battery like coil, is a nice one. But in practice, i do not think it will work. The discharge is so quick. Not sure if you can regulate that. Not sure if there are components who can do that either.
And what will be the gain?  You need time to charge the battery like coil and that costs time and amps. Then you lease it slowly as you can. Still it will be electrolysis. So, no gain here. No new technology.
Maybe you win some by result of better impedance matching.

I dont want to sound negative here, but i do want you guys to keep your head out of the clouds. Its hard. This hobby is tough.

Maybe we must start to think about which effects we wanna see. What the results must be. Maybe then, we create a technology that fits well.
Do we hunt a mans idea that voltage is doing work? No amps? Well, Stan stated himself that we do need amps. The testreport mentions 40 amps on the wfc.

Unless somebody seen something special happening with HV, then he is the man/women. I didnt see anything special. More heat, yes. More sparks, yes. But no ringing molecules, or impressive production.

The only thing i found, is that you can play with hydrogen molecules and activate them. That has been proven.

So, it more likely that Stan used simple electrolysis in a most efficient way. Then fouled around with the gas and then put it in the engine.
All the lies about 1700% more effiency is crap. That was stated by dummys who were looking at a system and didnt understand what they seen.
It was the alternator setup. As you can see on nthe schematics os Stan, he has put the ampmeter and the voltmeter on the rotor.
Result: 5V and 1 or 2 amps.
Gasproduction thru the roof!!!!!!!WOWOWOWOWOW
BUT: they forget the powerconsumption of the drivermotor of at least 1hp. aka 750watts.

Well, we all know by know that many of us make the same results with 750watts. At least i do.

The injector on Stans car is not injecting water. Its injecting HHO.
And that HHO was produced in a wfc with plates and no tubes. Stan only showed the tubes as example for the patent office. I know. I seen the buggy idle video. He used his testcell there as well.

I think we need people who can run an engine on a WFC and then go from there. My advise: go built a nice platecell. Get an engine running and then develope a gasprocessor and injectors.
Thats my opion on how Stan made his bug running.

Steve

Ever asked yourself: Plus on the inside or on the outside tube? Even Stan switched in his carrier from tubes...

In an electrolytic cell, the cathode is where the negative polarity is applied to drive the cell. Common results of reduction at the cathode are hydrogen gas or pure metal from metal ions. When discussing the relative reducing power of two redox agents, the couple for generating the more reducing species is said to be more "cathodic" with respect to the more easily reduced reagent.

In a galvanic cell, the cathode is where the positive pole is connected to allow the circuit to be completed: as the anode of the galvanic cell gives off electrons, they return from the circuit into the cell through the cathode.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathode

In physics or electronics, a cathode is an electrode that emits electrons into the device.


Steve

Dankie,

The only difference is that you can get a sinewave into your primairy coil, when you use a 2 transistor setup. That can work, if you have a 3 wire primairy.
http://www.aaroncake.net/circuits/inverter.asp
http://www.aaroncake.net/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=7123

I personally like the second one better.

Both circuits putting out a sinewave, which can be controlled in frequency.
The frequency range is limited by the propertys of the toroid.

Steve

Good post!

Steve

Very nice to know Dynodon...thx for sharing. I don't know if a layer is "needed", but, I do know however that the second SS touches oxygen it creates a chromium oxide layer....Also, I can show you Technical papers written on how such a layer is "seeded" onto SS through electrolysis, and how this layer is an N-type junction (semiconductor).
I have had personal emails with Ravi on his replication...he is for real, using a HV toroidal transformer and he got very little production until the layer was seeding (Also described an "aura" that is explained in the tunnel diode properties of the layer)...same thing is claimed in a "Breeding" Joe Cell (FYI Meyer tried with concentric circles too...he said they are second to the "cluster" formation in series)

So I do not think the main thing to be focused on is a layer at all...everyone needs to focus on their circuitry first and foremost, figure out how to turn on a circuit while turning off another (I will post my solution soon)

I do believe that no coating is required in this case. However, all calculations from Stan are LC based. That means he used a capacitor for something.
If you add the system he used, called EEC, then you can come to some nice conclusions.
He used HV. He used a capacitor. He used a circuit that transferred the charge from the capacitor.....
Sounds familiar?
You fill in the rest.....

Steve
 

this is not a patent this is an application for a patent  which is generally a breif one page description of what the patent pending will be     you can tell this by looking at the id number it is followed by A1 if it were a patent it would be B1

also application has a statment to federal sponsored research in claim 002    meaning  if it were ever issue it would be free to everyone and only credit for the invention and not ownership would be granted to dingle 

Thanks Dudly!

How come my above post isn't showing up? Took me forever to word it and get links/images...and, it says the stuff is in there when i go to edit it

Sorry Radiant. That sometimes happens. I am looking into it..
Did you had a youtube link in there?

Br
Steve

Hi members,

A new topic is made for this new theory aka challange.
Its about the technology in which we use an insulated positive electrode / tube /plate and a basic SS negative electrode/tube/plate.
When both electrodes are in a waterbucket, you have created a capacitor with water as dieelectric.

You can measure the capacitance perfectly with a standard LCR meter.
In my case, the tubeset i measured was around 1nF.

The theory is that we pulse the watercapacitor and then discharge the cap and in the proces we take the electrons out of the waterbucket.
This way, the water molecule should fall apart!
I have attached some pictures that show how the electrons behave in such setup.
If you discharge the electrons from the water and negative electrode, they run towards the positive electrode, which is insulated and not directly in touch with the water.
Then the proces should start again. Charge the cap and discharge by shorting.


Maybe we can get some bubbles this way? And even better, Ionized gas output?
Lets make this a worthy topic!

Steve

That is a very poor written patent....

Yes, it is interesting to read that Dingle thinks that there will be some hydrogen left after combustion.
Not sure if that is the case, because it is very flamable stuff, as we all know by now...
But maybe the proces inside the engine delivers some stuff that we are not aware off.

With Dingle, i always had the idea that he used the plates from a battery......

br
Steve

Answer of this person:

Yes Dankie that is the flux in which I speak.
Ideally you would read zero...but I doubt that it could be that
perfect. Let me clarify something...the amperage is not being consumed
at all. The fluxes are traveling in opposite directions, with opposite
spins. See, any time current (amperage) flows on a wire it creates
these "Eddy" currents we call flux. The current flow is directly
related to the flux intensity. If you lower the amperage the flux will
also fall in a linear fashion....So, inversely...if we stop the flux
flow we also stop the current flow....the current is essentially
"choked" out...hence the name choke coil
 

As for the "Bleeding Off"....this is key you get this.
 
+ and - are equal and opposite....If we get a true capacitor action in
the WFC...when we charge it up we will have + and - standing voltage
even after the power is turned off. In ALL capacitors...the insulator
is charged as well as the plates!
So in a water capacitor....the water itself will take on a charge and
elongate accordingly.
The only thing holding water together are 2 shared electrons between
the H and O...so it should be obvious that we are interested in
manipulating the -electrons.
 
The EEC works like this...
 
Voltage is applied and the water capacitor is charged to maximum. The
input circuit (being isolated) is disconnected, then a separate path
is opened up. In Meyer's pics you can clearly see it's a + electrode
supplied in the water...NOT PART OF THE TUBES/CAPACITOR
So, the on pulses charge the capacitor up...the charge circuit is
disconnected....The WFC should hold a HV charge.....A separate path is
opened ACROSS THE CAPACITOR to bleed off the voltage (like shorting it
out)...in this path is an "Electron consuming device"...or light
bulb....or LEDs.
 
Look here....Bearden gave it to us...w/o telling it was the WFC
          http://spiritofmaat.com/archive/feb2/feb2_bearden.htm


Furthermore, any ferrous(iron based) core is what they call a "flux
path"....this means that all of the flux is concentrated into the
iron. An air core has an even distribution of flux all around it...a
"flux envelope" if you will.
 
 
Let us imagine the flow through the "choke"...
Since the B-flow flows in one direction...when it interacts in the
choke, it flowing in one direction on the + side...and in the opposite
direction on the - side. The B-Flow is quite simplified in that
drawing, it actually corkscrews around the wire while spinning. These
two spinning corkscrews of flux meet in the bifilar coil on the iron
core...this concentrates both fluxes into the core and essentially
cancels the B-Flow...which then resists the flow of amperage.
The voltage potentials are still there pulling on them.
 
I need to find u a document on the flow...I will email it when I find it
 
 

I think this theory on charging the wfc with an insulated + tube/plate is a nice one.
Has anybody made a proof of concept , yet, as far as you know?
That JN is not a proof of concept to me, btw. I had some contact with him and he didnt convince me at all.

Steve

It looks like your message is empty...
Did you remove it yourself?

br
Steve

ha, balun impedance matching stuff...