tektrical

The next to last video.

Hello there Steve.
They are all mine.

Hi Neal.

Since hho is implosive, is your timing normal, or do you set it somewhere around BDC?  Is the combustion in the cylinder or the manifold?

__________

Grunge (grudge)

It's about getting more out of it than you have to put in from the batteries.

I think the part of it dealing with  "tuning in with voltage " plays a significant part ....(the repelling (ionization)part).Is it the electron or proton requires 13ev charge to eliminate the attraction force holding them together? Can't proof read my posts from my fone but u get wat I mean.

That's the electron.  A singly ionized water molecule retains both protons, through valance electron sharing.  But I thought I read somewhere that it's 16.9 ev?

I've wanted to go back and look at the reference with the 3rd ring electrode at the top of one drawing. ..the most I can remember was it dealt with the EEC .

In a soup consisting of water molecules, gas ions, and free electrons, a water molecule which becomes ionized by losing an electron will typically recapture the same, or different electron in 180 micro seconds.  (Just under two tenths mili second.)  This is in the absence of an external field which pulls the free electrons out of the mix.  And this recapturing is also prevalent with gas ions in the EEC which are non polarized and therefor bouncing around, rather than being stretched while held stationary.  A third electrode - connected to a charge pump circuit - can remove enough free electrons to allow the gas ions to remain ionized and become even more ionized by gaining energy through impact with other molecules.  I see no reason why a third electrode wouldn't also aid the water splitting process.  Pulse mode water splitting exceeds the maximun efficiency for Faraday type electrolysis by quite a bit.  As a result, the charge on the positive electrode can only neutralize a small percent of the free electrons given off by the water during a given pulse train.  For the best possible operation, the rest of the liberated electrons also need to be pulled out of the water.

Instinctively, Meyer's system should produce far more gas than shown.  It's quite possible something's missing from his schematics, whether he included that third electrode in his Exciter Array or not.  This is where a little experimenting is needed, to tell the tale. 

Looking at how the wires are connected to the tubes....it looks like they are the same polarity or at the very least ,the outer tube of one tube set is the same polarity of the inner tube of the adjacent tube set.
I haven't seen anybody talk about the function of having the tubes wired that way but it looks like they are effectively wired for the same polarity In some way.

I've been thinking about the possibility of free electron build up on one of the electrodes, relative to the other.    Cross wiring them like seen in his pictures would prevent sparking through the water, in a given tube set.  But the inductive bends in the jumpers could cause the array to act as a pulse forming network.  This might be important for balancing the impedance to an input PFN.

Here's an example of the type of balun I was remembering:

(https://s20.postimg.org/5n4wwfay5/balun2_1.gif)

Maybe a little far fetched, without a top connection except through the water.

I just started a new project involving a hidden wire inside the inner tube.  A pure static charge on this wire would place the same static polarity on the outside of each electrode tube.  But the inside surface of the outer tube would be the opposite polarity.  This, in itself, will polarize the water, and also present the sparking hazzard.

Dear all,

Most of us know that a bifilar coil has a high capacitance.
How about this: If we use in Meyers schematic a bifilar coil, is that like putting a capacitor in front of  2 normal choke coils?

A bifilar coil produces two wave forms from a single wave input.  JL Naudin shows that Tesla's bifilar pancake coil will drive Meyer's cell.  But he still had to use a choke, to choke off the amps.



Also, Meyer did not use normal choke coils.  The output from the secondary went to the choke coils, but his choke coils were also secondary windings themselves, being on the same core as the primary.  Therefor, Meyer chokes produce two wave forms, exactly the same as Tesla's bifilar coil.

Thanks for sharing your information.  I'm in the process of replicating your set up, but I'll leave it up to you to take it beyond this point.  Whatever you decide to present.

What's the polarity of your electrodes?  It looks like you're getting some plasmon formation.

Some power supplies build voltage gradually.  When shorted by a load resistance, the voltage never gets too high.  What if a spark gap were placed in series with the cell, so that the voltage has to reach a high level before it's applied?

did you saw his patents? i mean john quincy st clair?

he show some formula... he proposes that using a combination of fields is possible to calculate in a matrix the curvature generated.. and he says it can be used for thrust and other means

all based in his wormhole generator apparently

is hard to tell how he got this stuff patented talking about contact with other civilizations etc,,,

but i understand what you are saying GEON but i also think maybe theres more than what books tells apparently.. we should try to match some of the hard science knowledge with this claims to try understand whats going on.. when i got back to Brazil and into the physics university was for this reason.. meyer talked the language of science and it seemed the most reasonable way to learn it.. and perhaps understand something more.

if patents never exists maybe we would have time machines by now =D

I completely agree with your assessment of st Clair.  He's more than a little 'out there'.  So I have to discount what he presents.  But I don't know that we DON'T have time machines already.  I was recently watching a chem trail jet, and it suddenly jumped quite a ways forwards, leaving a big gap in the exhaust stream.  Just teleportation, or maybe something more?

Stan tried to explain us his theory about using Voltage for breaking down the water molecule.
He wanted to overcome the attraction force of the bonding electrons.
Sofar nobody really explained this to me in a normal way.
I did some research and i want to share that with you, here on our forum.

The photoelectronic spectrum of H2O reveals four different energy levels that correspond to the ionization energies of the two bonding and two nonbonding pairs of elections at 12.6eV, 14.7eV, 18.5eV, and 32.2eV.

So what does that mean now?
It means that you need somewhere between 12,6 and 32,2 volts per bonding electron.

Now it becomes massive and tricky.

If you have two electrodes and you put 12,6v, you never ever get 12,6V on 1 molecule of water.
I explain: You dont have 1 electron on that electrode. You have a lot of them. And you have to divide the applied voltage per electron going to the other electrode.
If you have two electrons moving to the other electrode, you have 6,3V per electron.

So, back to Stans theory.
He needed to to use small electrodes, which he did. He had to use high voltage (lots of electrons)
Otherwise he would not be able to do any covalent bond breaking at all.

So, now it is you turn.
If we take 1 square inch of flat electrode.
How many electrons do you have on it when you apply 20kv?

Thanks for posting those photo electron voltages, Steve.  I wasn't aware that Stan was into that aspect.  One value he left out is the 6.1 ev for breaking out a single Hydrogen, leaving hydroxyl.  But keep in mind that these are kinetic energy values, representing precise electron velocities to produce impact dissociation.  A cloud of electrons traveling at one of the indicated velocities will produce the desired effect when injected into some water mist.  Vibrating free electrons in a water bath, at the exact velocity to cause the molecules to split, would be a good trick, and might be a more complex approach than is needed.  This is a quantum effect - a tiny bit too much voltage, and it won't work.

Stan put a space after every five pulses, to allow the cell to discharge.  This was at a much higher frequency than your test.  With your low frequency pulses, the space has to be much longer.

It's interesting that the cell's discharge time is so long with very low frequency pulses.  Why is a much shorter period needed with extremely high pulse repetition?

Standing Waves can also pump positive particles, using the point of a safety pin as the central electrode.   The direction of this movement is perpendicular to the sparking.  Twist the pointed end of the pin out at a 90 degree angle, then put a bend in the other end, to form a triangular base which holds the pointed end straight upwards.  Put it in the MW and the point will turn white from the electron emission produced by the standing waves.  Then the point will start to boil off, with metal particles flying straight outwards.  The sputtering effect is caused by negative ions in the air impacting against the point, which is positive due to loosing the electrons.  Impacts cause the boiling, but not the outwards acceleration.

So I'm wondering how thin a layer of water would have to be to not block this effect?  If the water sputtering does happen, there's a good chance of dissociation upon impact with the ball electrode which forms on the top end of the pin.

Thats nice....are you familiar with envelope detector curcuits and why they are used?
With this spherical cell...the patent plainly says water but  doesn't a gas seem more logical ?
I was pretty sure Samuel Leach had a patent for a similar configuration aided with a laser but I cant find it to post for reference.
Im replying to just be a part of the conversation,I havent built this type cell yet....it looks interesting!

I dont know the significance of the different degrees of pulses in fig 2 of the Canadian patent ....can someone explain that?

I haven't heard of the envelope detector circuits, and don't know if I would have the skill to build one.  But they sound interesting, so I'll check into it.  Thanks for the tip.

I think the sprerical cell can be used for either gas or water, but they would have different size resonances due to the differing break down voltages.

The diagram with the increasing pulse intervals represents a type of resonance in which pulses are applied at the begining of each vibration, when the vibrations have increasing amplitude, with longer and longer periods, as opposed to applying a number of pulses, each of which directly increases the magnitude of a single ongoing elongation of the molecules.

And I think eveyone here appriciates your input; you don't have to build something to discuss how it might work.

Ive allways wanted to know if the impedance card Stans brother shows in his patent was also included but hidden in Stans circuitry?

I'm building a pulse unit which combines the ripple voltage from two capacitors, each with its own diode T-tap circuit.  One cap has an inductive bend, which provides a phase shift.  I got the motor/generator system off of YouTube.  I pulled the gears out of the MW oven turntable motors, then coupled the DC motors directly to the spinning magnets.  With 12VDC to the top motors, the bottom motors put out mains voltage AC.  One DC motor is a little smaller, so its cap's frequency will be slightly lower.  This will produce a beat frequency in the output, something which can accelerate charged particles in a plasma.  The ripple voltage outputs from the caps are combined through a resistor.  With rf, this would need to be a pad.  The output from the resistor will have to be at least a #10 AWG, to avoid adding additional impedance.  And there are, of course, other ways of generating the ripple voltage.  Stan's brother supposedly knew everything he was doing, so there's a good chance Stan was using what Steven shows.

Farnsworth's diagram shows that the magnetic field tips 90 degrees when the electric field reverses at 180.  My biphasic longitudinal spark illustrates this effect.  (The positive force in this example doesn't regenerate, with further extension, because the negative spikes separate in different directions, lacking overall rotation.)  At 7.5 kV, I'm getting just over one half inch per kiloVolt, although this factor is likely to be different when dealing with water.  For resonance, the length of the positive part of the spark needs to match the distance between the electrode surfaces.  With very little current, a number of pulses would have to be applied to drive the spark's full extension.  (I did see someone else's rapidly rotating negative spark one time, shooting for more than two feet, continuously.)  I was lucky to get the picture I got, with a single pulse from a large capacitor which was barely big enough. 

The patent mentions the electrical polarization process, but this particular system would need reverse bias.  The charged particles are repelled from the positively charged central electrode, rather than elongated in place, so the positive side of the molecules would need to face inwards.

Tesla believed that longitudinal magnetic waves can't exist outside of a vacuum.  In a physical medium, magnetic forces will interact with matter, producing electric fields which convert the waves to electromagnetic energy.  However, he did bounce some kind of longitudinal waves off the moon.  These waves may have been electrostatic or diamagnetic.  Both of these effects require two signals, just as do Tesla's Stationary Waves.  Standing Waves, on the other hand, are composed of a single wave and its reflection.  All of these waves can impart longitudinal movement to a charged particle.  But it's interesting to note that Meyer used TWO epgs to power his dune buggy.  With this apparatus, it's easier to adjust the wavelength to match the distance from the end of the injector to the top of the piston.  (Or the other side of the cylinder).

If a VIC is used with a spherical cavity, determine the wavelength of the VIC's output, then size the cavity to resonate with the available signal.  Or else use some other way to produce the biphasic energy which allows the output to be adjusted to match an existing cavity.

I've been snowed under here lately; this time of year, fire wood labor requires way too much of my time.  But I finally took some time to read the Canadian patent, and this isn't what I thought it was.  It CAN be used as a Farnsworth system with a vertical seam and insulating gasket between the two hemispheres, and a loose mesh for the central electrode.  But the patent states that the electrodes maintain the same respective polarities.  So it's a normal Meyer type system.

There is some uncertainty with his usage of the term resonance.  He says the particle velocity increases indefinitely, without periodic gating.  So the resonance frequency must be related to the gating period.  This is shown in the chart as a relative proportion to the voltage.  (Which he said somewhere needs to be at least a kV).  The pulse frequency itself is shown relative to the gating interval.

One issue I have with the patent is the suggestion that the cavity be sized according to a pre-selected resonance value.  I think it would be better to do what Adrian did and build it with available components, then determine the resonance of what we have.