TGS

Thanks Man i will do the tests and share a table here soon as possible... you will see it i need to plug the old vics to do it...

i just tested my new coil... its just amazing... i never saw a transformer do the following:

it reduce the amps as frequency decreasessssssss

it increase the current consumption as the kilohertz get higher with the chokes open circuited... its very impressive...

primary over the secondary...  18 turns agains two chokes of 550turns each interleaved in the same direction,. 18awg 

i´m not sure if is it not a limitation of my Half bridge since it has only 4 capacitors to hold the current and so the greater the freauency the greater will be the current they can provide...

the transfomation fator for the coils in series is around 75 from voltage measrement,,,

As I told you before these transformers do not make their high voltages by way of the transformer's turn ratio.

(http://i1025.photobucket.com/albums/y320/h2opower/THEFIRSTVICFIGURE8XA.jpg)
Note Meyer's words in that he states that, "increased coil length equally increases applied voltage level/amp restriction..."
It's best for you to follow our lead on this and I can give you some pointers in that the chokes and secondary should have had a turn count of 2850 turns each. For as of right now you are building them all wrong trying to get high voltage by means of the transformer's turn ratio for they simply don't work that way. The way you are going right now looks good on paper but you failed to take into account the load capabilities of the transformer you are building as built that way they simply can not take the load the WFC places on them.

As you can see me going back to the old 8xa circuit was a good thing as I learned some valuable information by doing so.

So, if you build it like you are planning to do you are on your own as it's either "our way or the highway!" I for one haven't the time to be messing around with someone that comes in this late in the game and doesn't know how to follow the lead of those that are far ahead of them.

Now that you have the right tool for the job lets get a real reading at points D&E so we can see just what needs to be done to get your voltage up. Just know and understand I did what I did as solution to a problem in that Electrotek was using your ignorance to pit you against me back then and after I analysed the problem that was the solution to get you on the side of Meyer.

So, are you ready to give us a real voltage reading using an oscilloscope and your differential probe at points D&E or do we stop progress for you because you aren't willing to share that information? This is a choice you have to make as I can't walk through this door for you. Don't worry about showing us low voltage readings as the goal is to get your voltage up, okay?

Recap from the 2013 Global BEM interview, what did I state is the goal we are trying to achieve in how we go about breaking the bonds of the water molecules with this technology? Ionization, correct? Now the rules for ionizing atoms don't change for anyone. If electricity is used then it takes a high voltage potential difference to get the atoms to release their electrons. This high voltage potential difference must be applied to the plates of the resonant cavities of the exciter array which we are to measure at points D&E as shown in this drawing or across the individual resonant cavities themselves which is not shown in this drawing:
(http://i1025.photobucket.com/albums/y320/h2opower/circuit-scope4_zps0z3predb.jpg)
As I stated the rules for ionization don't change so just what did change to have Meyer to build all of this stuff? Answer is the medium changed as air has far more resistance than water does and this loss of resistance must be compensated for so that the conditions of ionization can be met for the targeted atoms we wish to ionize. Basically just as I stated in the 2013 Global BEM interview the conditions of air ionization must be forced on the water molecules in order to get at the atoms so that they can be ionized. As you can see my tune hasn't changed since then as I am saying the same things now as I said back then but with a little more clarity. Perhaps you have seen this equation before, E = √ (PxR), as now we need to apply it to our designs in building the VIC transformers correctly to be able to place a high voltage potential difference on the plates of the water fuel capacitor.

Read the right side of the photo shown below:
(http://i1025.photobucket.com/albums/y320/h2opower/2015-11-25_031811_zpsh5d681p4.png)
And perhaps we will talk more about this on a latter date.

You spoke of the past when I rose against you and I was correct in doing so as I was right back then as I am right right now but I still had more to learn and perhaps still do as I don't have all the answers.

i´m just sorry if you think i want to atack anyone...

I am just trying to get you to tell everyone the truth as when you told everyone that you were getting 50kv to you cell you didn't even have the right equipment to read what you where applying to your cell. Seeing that you don't seem to be able to take a hint I will be blunt this time. The reasons why the truth needs to be told is your claims are thousands of volts over what Meyer states are to be the working requirements for the exciter array. Meyer states 1kv or more per resonant cavity which means for a wfc of your size would need 11kv or more to run it. We can't move forwards with claims like these being left unchecked as they go to the core of this technology in that Meyer was not telling us the truth or you were not telling us the truth as someone is lying. The measurement is to be taken at points D&E just as Meyer took his which is across the wfc. There are other things you said that need clarification but I will start with this one first as it goes to clear Meyer's name.

That waveform is very old as with all of the negative responses why share any new data? is my thinking. As for me sharing my theories nah as now it's all about the company's mission. People had their chance with me and blew it. You were the last one Sebosfato and your comments on the RWG are well noted.

Right now I have a business already set up and ready to go. I design practically everything and did things the hard way by making use of the scientific and engineering methods and some good old fashion trial and error. I'm not worried about who does it first as whoever they are they still will have to figure out a way to bring the technology to market which I have already done. In the end the cheapest prices are going to win out just as Meyer says. From what I can tell the exciter array will cost most people $2500 or more and I redesigned it to cost much less. The same goes for all of Meyer's technology that I feel is relevant. I put my skills to work and made them to be as cost effective as I could possibly build them as what good is this technology if no one can afford it? 

TGS I dont believe that Meyer really worked in a KV range,  only at the coils, back EMF directed by the Diode,during the pulse off time. that produces high voltage spike at very high speed / low time.

The coils were wrapped in same direction, making part of the secondary transformer, and you can clearly see what happens with a coil in the same core in series with secondary windings with the same phase orientation... You can see it on TV flyback transformers (NOTE THAT: Stan didnt use it as flyback topology, but it work the same principle for all transformers).

Sum the 3 coils and you will see what i am talking about...

You’re on the right track but you still have to get the right tools for the job at hand, IE, a differential probe. This one isn't all that costly and works well for our needs as it reads 5kv over the benchmark Meyer set for us: https://www.globalmediapro.com/dp/A2H108/Pintek-DP-15K-Differential-Probe-35MHz-15kV/ This way you can truly see what is being applied to your load. This is a video that lets you understand how these things work:

The science behind this technology isn't going to change in that the atoms of the water molecules are the true targets for ionization. Getting the voltage to the load is the tricky part and trust me you are on the right track in your line of thinking but you must expand on it greatly. When I show high voltages being applied to the exciter array, which is the load, people like to be in competition with me instead of trying to work with me to get their setups getting the same voltages. They resort to telling us all lies to make themselves look like they are doing better than I am but fail to understand the claims they make put them way past the benchmark voltage given to us by Stanley Meyer himself and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to tell just who is telling a tall one.
I do what I can for them but for the most part they paint themselves into a corner which forces them to defend the claims they have made and until they come clean they can never truly get back to work as most of their time will be spent on defending or hiding the claims that they have made.  I accept what the differential probe tells me and move to figure out better ways towards reaching the benchmark given to us by Meyer. I may understand the science behind it all but that still leaves me with the challenge of learning how to build it all correctly. Like you I understand these transformers don’t work like a typical transformer does as the jobs they are required to do are different from the typical transformers on the market today.
Just when I think I got my head around this something new is learned that requires a design change. Since funds are low like many of you these changes take time to be completed and put through a good round of testing. What made me stop sharing my work are all the non-stop negative comments to the work I have shown in the spirit of true Open Source. And the all-out rejection of the explanations given as to why it isn’t producing the gases at the level of what we expect it to produce based on what Meyer talks about in his many lecture videos and patent information.  I remember answering a question on why it doesn’t produce the gases at the level in which eye witnesses describe the technology doing? And the answer is given in this analogy; If one hooks up an ozone generator to a variable voltage transformer how much ozone will it create at just 20 volts of input? The answer to this question is none as that voltage is below the ionization threshold for the oxygen atoms that make up the oxygen molecules.  They didn’t like this simple analogy and they didn’t understand the science behind the technology at the time and many still don’t to this day.
So, as you can see there is not much I can do for them but move on and leave them behind and behind I have left them.  When I talk about the science now it’s like I am coming out of left field from their perspective as they are still a long ways behind me in their understanding of this technology, and there is not much I can do about that.

TGS have you ever look at the stan documents where he says there is 24 turns or 33?

he yes have chokes where there is less turns in the state you can see it

why

well i dont know exactly yet why but i have found a reson for it... so we people thinking and working and not just only copying have a hard time designing and thinking of thigs that will have a understandable result...

after all this years, getting in the university and learning and training how to think, why should i get blind and copy?

i rather prefere to develop my theories and test them... one will work one day maybe.. theres not so many possibilities of connection...

i wish stanley meyer was here to defend himself he would have laught over what we wrote about him and sure not feel like a lier...

when i suspect someone does not tell the true i´m not calling him a lier i just say that he has his reason to say that in that way and it may be mislead you ..  this is called neuro programed language its very used to let you be convinced of something without even understand it ,.. like all this non scientists believe blindly in stan... its a feeling caused by the sequence of words he chose to explain this... and by the greed of the men

so lier is who say to have something and than dont have,  this could be: a theory, a working cell, the only right theory...

who say that know something and dont knows for me is a basic lier

who say is doing a hard job and keep posting all day on internet is a gigantic lier

i could be a part of this

i know i would be a lier if i tell you that i´m physicist and my theory is correct and you should tried because i´m sure of it... right?

yes


etc...

until someone show a cell working and explain it for real there is no right way...

for me only thing that is important is to respect mina results and hope it has some explanation why it suposed to be working... ok?

and all.. .

Now Sebosfato your taking things personally. I merely am stating the facts given this information about the VIC's that ran Meyer's dune buggy:
(http://i1025.photobucket.com/albums/y320/h2opower/2016-01-04_082652_zpsbamvrm7k.png)
As you can see there are resistance readings and the size of the wires used. With this information one can calculate how many feet of wire is in the coils all of them. What makes this data good is it is from what was actually in Meyer's setup. This is the raw data from which we need to gain more understanding of Meyer's work.
You run around telling everyone that you are getting upwards of 50kv to your cell or have you forgotten making such statements before you got your differential probe? For Meyer tells us about the working conditions of the resonant cavities you are getting 4545 volts to each of your 11 resonant cavities which is 3545 volts over what Meyer tells us is the working conditions for a resonant cavity. So, either you are telling us a tall tale or Meyer is. Can you see the problem with making these grand claims yet?

Each time you make these grand claims you are over what Meyer says is to be the working voltages for the resonant cavities given they are built to the specs which Don Gable provided for us. I have simply had enough of these grand claims that make Meyer out to be a lair and make my work on all of this appear to be utterly useless. You think it was easy learning how to put a high voltage potential difference on the plates of the exciter array which, for your information, is the load of the system in the form of resistance, IE, Re? Then you get a differential probe and refuse to give us a true voltage reading at points D&E shown in this photo:
(http://i1025.photobucket.com/albums/y320/h2opower/circuit-scope4_zps0z3predb.jpg)
I know you are getting a really low voltage at these points as I have been where you are already. But your pride is such that you would even pull apart your differential probe because you don't like the readings it is giving you instead of trying to figure out how to get more voltage to the load. I know it's hard with all of this false information going about on the internet with stupids at the RWG now claiming that you need zero volts at points D&E. But come on make sense of it as is that what Meyer says in the New Zealand video? No! So again somebody is lying. Sure they have a lot of nice looking paper weights but that doesn't mean much as the rules of science isn't going to change just for them. It takes high voltage to ionize atoms with electricity to get them to start losing their electrons. This fact of science isn't going to change and can't be ignored. Meyer repeatedly states the use of high voltage being used to pull apart the water molecules.

Once I realized this I went looking to see if any other molecules where being pulled apart by taking their electrons away from the atoms that made them up and guess what? I found a whole lot of them even water being pulled apart by way of ionization in nature. I even published a working theory on all of this with a few examples found in nature to show it's validity. It turns out this is taking place so much all around us that it is mind boggling that we never seen it before but we were blind to it as we never ask the right questions.

Like everyone here I have to learn how to build this technology correctly to be able to put high voltage to the load and I am getting close to what Meyer states are the working voltages for the resonant cavities being 1kv or more per resonant cavity. Don't be like a seagull running around swallowing up everything people with nice photos tell you as if they aren't following science then what they are trying to get you to eat is not good for you. What I am doing right now is learning how to get more voltage to the load so I can finally reach the benchmark Meyer sets for us with again is 1kv or more per resonant cavity.

 

oops

http://www.truegreensolutions.net/index.php?p=1_9_Water-for-fuel-technology

That someone would be me.

The hydrogen will always go to form the hydrogen molecule but the oxygen will not. Once the oxygen has depleted the oxygen molecules from which to join with and create ozone it will remain as a monatomic gas atom for a while. The reason why these monatomic oxygen gas atoms don't come together all that quickly is they all have the same charge and like charges repel, correct?

A long time ago this got me to thinking about just what was creating all of this excess energy and it dawned on me that the oxygen atom is responsible for this in Meyer's technology as it has far more electrons to lose and Meyer is actually targeting them to take away up to 4-5 electrons away from the oxygen atoms prior to using them for the creation of the water molecules by being spark ignited in the presence of hydrogen.

Once the reaction is started these two atoms must form the water molecules but they can't as the oxygen atom is missing electrons. Meyer called this extended time prolonging the formation of the water molecules as once the reaction was started these atoms have to come up with the missing electrons from the zero point. It is here where all of the excess energy comes from as E=MC2 tells us the energy given off for the creation of these missing electrons as the electrons have mass.

Give this some thought...

Shalom,
TGS

about the resonant action.. where the gas keep comming out... thats because stan said it is arranged to become as self sustained oscillation system... it mean that when he gates it the oscillation on the coils will keep going...

i will tell you one thing guys


in my opinion of a simple man the wfc is a sort of capacitor that has a capacitance leap when the gas is generated... when this happens across the cell a very high voltage apear across the cell... its analogous to change the dielectric value or forcing charged electrodes to go far from each other...

this is

sit where you are

amplification  of energy

right?

so if we get the point where gas is generated and the Q factor of the system is above a certain value the system will indeed oscillate undefinately untill parameter change and its pulled out of resonance or actually up to the point where theres no more water

now you see why resonance action? do you see i´m not bla bla bla my friend?

do you see that if you ionize water it gets conductive and you kill the high voltage you are trying to put into it... at least in one point of view electric fields are also defined by the current going thru a resistive media so if you get both equations aside you see that if you get purer water is even better than filling with chemicals for example even if the chemical would distort the molecules making them weakened ... 

you kill the high voltage from the inside, yes you generate a small gas since you are breaking the molecule by ionization... however as you do this you are just doing a very high brute force electrolysis... just the same... you are ionizind because there is nothing less to allow the current flow.. big deal the real big problem with electrolysis sis that you need to set an overvoltage potential and this leads the efficiency to such small factor, including polarization is what really causes the electrolysis to be unefficient...  you set a potential and the cell set a backelectromotive potential that force you to add at least this amount of potential to the electron so it can win the barrier and pass thru``..

you see your ionization idea duplicate this error in a gigantic manner... HV+HIGH AMPS = HIGH POWER 

YOU ARE GOOD INTENTION i value that.. i hope you just ask yourself...is there anyone in this world who maybe know something else i dont?

i guess my secret is to ask this every day to my self and try to understand what i dont!

if you leave something on for 1 second and it keeps on for 90 seconds the Q and amplification factor is very huge

i told you all this and yet didnt touched my theory.. thats because its to be released if i prove that its correct or just to tell you what i did and you can do also if you want... 

my idea is not to be the hho man... i just want to make it work and put all of you in front of it and ask if you want to change the world in the way its better to be... than if you want to help great otherwise you get your water car and keep going...

I'll take this to my thread as I'd like massive and I to keep working together on this.

your ignorance wont help you...

please film yourself while you burn your ph meter...

Thanks for you concern for my finances but you must be made aware that I have spent a lot of money in dealing with this technology in order to learn more about it so if the meter burns out that's just the cost of trying to learn something about this technology trust me I am use to it already. Is that why you wont get a differential probe for you are concerned it will burn out on you? You have to be willing to break a few eggs with this technology as we are dealing with a lot of unknowns.
I've spent months putting things together only to watch them burn up within a few minutes after being tested. It doesn't detour me as I learn from my mistakes as all I do is figure out what went wrong, fix the problem, and try again that is part of the scientific method. But I guess that is why you don't like to make use of the scientific method as it requires that you fail many times over until you get it right which a lot of times has a high cost to all of those failures, huh?

I could lay it all out on a line for you but what's the point as each time that I do you never acknowledge anything that you have been shown. In fact most of the time when I do lay it all out on the line for you you reject the science and or body of evidence outright with statements that have nothing supporting them other than they are an idea in your mind that you have chosen to cling too. So, again what's the point of showing you anything if your stance is always that of a Naysayer? Given the overwhelming body of evidence shown that lead towards this technology dealing with IONIZATION you still come in here and say "no it doesn't" without anything supporting your arguments for saying so. To date I have shown a number of reactions taking place in nature that show the original idea is supported by them and one of them even breaks the bonds of the water molecules with ionization and you still come in here and say, "It has nothing to do with ionization." The body of evidence that has been shown is stacked in my favor as they all support the idea that the water molecules are being broken down by way of ionization. Why are you so resistant to the body of evidence you are being shown as support for the idea especially when one of them actually does breaks the bonds of the water molecules with ionization? But my guess is that you missed that one, huh? The one where the bonds of the water molecules are actually being broken down by way of ionization as you never bothered to read anything posted fully, correct? Is this what you are learning in school to ignore supporting evidence and only make use of the scientific method as a last resort if it doesn't fit with how you think things work? If so you should be failing your classes as that is not how science is taught.

^^^ thats 2 for 2 electrons which is the same ol electrolysis , but what if the water molecule wasnt allowed to reform

From my observations nothing comes together in the field thus giving the chance for hydrogen and oxygen gas production all I need to do now is run the experiment and check to see if the hydronium concentration went up and that will be all the proof we need. I must also check to see how long it takes the water to go back into equilibrium with a ph of 7. Thanks for everything as this puts us clearly on the right path as now I know how to calculate the hydronium ion concentration from the ph readings. This reaction should push the system out of equilibrium as why else would Meyer say it takes time to stop producing gas after the power is turned off?

As for anyone with lots of doubt I must ignore you now as I haven't the time to lay it all out on the line for you to understand just what is going on anymore.

TGS

(http://i1025.photobucket.com/albums/y320/h2opower/10_5VOLTAGECHARINGEFFECT.png)

As said in Meyer's work a "difference of potential across the water gap." I really don't think I need to explain myself any further do I? as Meyer puts it in writing for us right here. The actual waveform looks a little different but I just explained to everyone how to interpret their data when looking at these wave forms. With that being said let us look at this waveform again and notice that at first there is a potential difference that is negative and positive but as time goes on the negative voltage actually turns into positive voltage which is just a difference of positive voltage, correct?

(http://i1025.photobucket.com/albums/y320/h2opower/Maxswaveform_zps9f62fd25.png)

Now that you all know how to go about reading and interpreting the experimental data you can see that this waveform shows a failure to get the maximum potential difference as the negative side isn't charging up. Meyer has it clearly marked showing a B+ and B- voltage and in this screen shot the negative voltage potential doesn't start to build up. After comparing what the two of us did differently the load that Max placed on the VIC transformer is a lot greater than the load I placed on the VIC transformer and the result of doing so was a loss in the negative voltage potential or B- voltage.

Now thanks to Massive we should all be able to see that Meyer's work is that of Ionization as that is a property of the water molecules have and this technology makes it so it is not such a random event as the conditions are made favorable by placing water molecules in a high voltage potential difference field.

Shalom,
TGS

The water molecules can be charged both ways so don't think of it as a zero voltage but one side carrying the positive charge and the other side carrying the negative charge and they meet in the middle.

In learning how to read the scope shoots you must look at the near vertical lines as those are the times when the positive and negative voltages are taking place at near the same time.
(http://i1025.photobucket.com/albums/y320/h2opower/personalpics009_zpscf31888c.jpg)
These times are taking place very fast much faster than the relaxation time for water. This is the proper way to read these scope shoots as the times are not equal but near equal and the water molecules are at those times subject to the maximum potential difference that the VIC transformers are making. The frequency for this scope shot is around 5k Hz and that's 5000 times per second. The reading on the oscilloscope give the viewer a false impression of time sort of like riding in a car at high speeds with the windows rolled up. As long as you keep you hands inside of the car you really have no sense of just how fast you are moving but as soon as you put your hand outside then you can feel the speeds you are traveling at.

It is at these near vertical lines where the potential voltages is to be measured at as due to the blocking diode the positive goes to the B+ plate and the negative goes to the B- plate and as you can see the times are almost the same. Remember the blocking diode is acting as a switch so even though it looks like an A/C wave form it is not as the blocking diode will not allow it to be an A/C waveform. So, as you can see it's not good enough to have the ability to see the wave forms produced by the VIC transformers being placed on the exciter array but one must also know and/or understand how to interpret the data they are seeing. This is where I am forced to ignore a lot of people as they simply don't have the necessary education to be able to to solve a technology such as this. If they don't do things the right way they are of little use to me and to this technology as far as figuring it out goes. Following the scientific method is a must for this technology as it has a lot of original ideas in it thus one can't look up a lot of things in any of our books of antiquity. So far I have found three original ideas and created a fourth one on my own. Ideas like these make it very hard for anyone to back engineer this technology as these are totally new ideas and the only way to figure them out is with the use of the scientific method as it forces people to run many experiments.

So, in answering your question the water molecules take the voltage from the plates to the center if the voltages of the B+ and B- voltage fields are equal as water can be charged both ways.

I hope this allows you to understand the need to get the right equipment to do the job as if you don't you are truly flying in the blind on this technology and I am forced to not accept any of your work as it doesn't follow the guidelines the scientific method sets for us all to follow. If anyone refuses to follow the scientific method then I must refuse to accept their work as that is just the way things have to be. I don't make many assumptions as I rely on experimental data and observations to make choices as that is the way the scientific method allows me to move forwards with this technology. I hope this lets everyone understand how I work and why I seem to be so strict all the time.

Shalom,
TGS

Hello, why in your analysis the point of great potential diference is in the middle of the electrodes?

in your theory the gas is generated right in middle of the cell TGS?

in my point of view correct me please if i'm wrong... the cell has the greater intensity field right over the surface of the inner electrode.. and it decays over distance because of screening of charge and polarization effects...

so how can be the center of the cell the point with greater potential difference?

according to physics parallel plates have linear electric field strength distribution while concentric case has stronger near the smaller electrode...

thanks


ps... in attachment my "differential" wave forms ... across cell... pulse in.... Va ... Vb...

It's because water is being used as a dielectric material. Many working on this technology have noticed that there is gas being generated right in the center of the high voltage potential zones. When you add these experimental observations to Meyer's words telling us each water molecules acts like a tiny capacitor then right in the center of the cell will be the greatest plain of potential difference as each little water molecule capacitor will carry the voltage over to the next water molecule as remember they are all in a straight line between the electrodes.

The drawing is based on my observations of the many experiments I have performed and helped me reason out just how the process was taking place between the cells on a molecular level with IONIZATION in mind as after all water, no mater how pure, will do this all on it's own naturally. The drawing is only an illustration designed to further my knowledge on the inner workings of this technology and could be incorrect.

Other things to note is this assumes the B+ and B- voltages are equal for if they are not equal then that center will move to the side with the greatest voltage. This is why when people only have a positive voltage shown on the scope the water will heat up as they will be pushing amps through the water bath for the magnetic current quenching effect of the opposed chokes wont be balanced.

theres also Roger Billings 1965  = http://rogerbillings-hydrogen.blogspot.co.nz/?3 times , succesfully for 3 men who will forever be connected to Hydrogen

I'm actually in contact with Roger Billings. He is a very nice man and has a wonderful family. He is aware of Meyer's work but doesn't know how it works. I have seen Dr. Dingles set up and it did have chokes much the same as Stanley Meyer did but he used some different metals in his cell.

The bottom line is the core science of how to split the water molecules is the same for each and everyone of these people as that is how science works. It took me a while to get at the core science as it wasn't easy to figure out but in the end I finally did understand the core science that drives all of these technologies. I pointed everyone at photosynthesis but none would listen, then Dobbie found yet another one that pointed at the same method for separating the water molecules outside of Dr. Faraday's electrolysis method or so it seemed to be but on closer evaluation electrolysis also separates the water molecules in this manor with it's use of current. The science I uncovered is sound, proven, and validated already but it is new so I have to go through all of the proper channels to get the science in the text books. In the meantime while I wait for the scientific community to accept the concepts I am free to pursue this technology understanding what must be done to the water molecules to get them to break down into their component atoms. If you watched the Global BEM video interview then you also have been exposed to just how the water molecules are being broken down as the core science I talk about there you will have noticed that my tune hasn't changed one bit as I am singing the same song now as I was back then.

The problems as I see it are ego, pride, glory or fame seekers, and greed. All it took was a few well placed lies to throw everyone off the track of how to go about breaking the bonds of the water molecules the same way Meyer and a few others did. I have come to call these people that do such things "Blind Leaders" taken from Mathew 15:14 in the bible. These Blind Leaders and their blind followers don't ask the hard questions or show any proof of concept. Most of the time they will not show anything at all other than what thoughts they have between their ears. They will say things that make Meyer out to be a total liar and none of the blind followers ever check them on it as they accept the Blind Leaders word to be as good as gold. After fighting with them for several years now I have given up as these Blind Leaders and their blind followers don't like science or engineering methods and like to sit back and start and watch a lot of drama that others start as it makes for good entertainment. One thing that holds true about these Blind Leaders is normally they come and then they slowly fade away leaving their blind followers in the ditch. The part that surprised me is these blind followers are not mad at being in a ditch and fight anyone trying to lead them out of the ditch as in the ditch all ideas are accepted and everything is cost effective and it doesn't matter that nothing works as that isn't the goal anymore. Nope the new goal is to have your ideas heard and be accepted by everyone and never fact checked by anyone. Anyone that comes in asking for facts, proof of concept, and verification of results or claims is quickly shown the door as they are not accepting everyone's ideas to be as good as gold. Thus ruled a trouble maker and tossed out of the harmonious group where everyone pats each other on the back for a job never done. After dealing with these people for several years I simply gave up and have moved on as they like it in the ditch and anyone that comes and tries to pull them out of it will be sorry.

The New Zealand video is the one where Meyer told just how this technology actually works. Add that to Arthur C. Clark's eye witness video and anyone should be able to get this technology up and running provided that they are willing to fail, get back up, learn from their failures, and try again. They also must have or be willing to spend what ever it takes to get solutions to problems found fixed no matter the cost. You all have examples to follow from the information Don Gable provided to everyone to help guide your efforts and there are many other sources of useful information that are on the net that one could follow to aid their efforts at understanding this technology. The first thing is you must build it correctly as then even if you don't fully understand the technology you are following the right steps that could lead to understanding of this technology. Second you must follow the scientific and engineering methods even if done so loosely as you need some form of structure that is proven to get results over time. Not everyone can do this as most of the time one's finances limit what one can do as even the proper test equipment cost big bucks let alone building things correctly which cost far more.

I hope this little speech of mines doesn't fall on deaf ears.
Take care all,
TGS

The award for who was first I think belongs to Dr. Dingle of the Philippines as he was riding the President of the Philippines around in 1969 which is before most of you where even born. http://fuel-efficient-vehicles.org/energy-news/?page_id=928
I use to talk to him on the phone before he passed away in 2010. My wife had to interpret for me as his dialect was too strong for me to be able to understand him clearly.

As you all can see there is a lot you don't know about me. For me what I saw was missing from all of these inventors was a hard scientific look at just what was taking place in terms of science or that is to say the core science behind all of these inventors work. It took me a while to get at this core science behind the patents and claims and to my credit I did share it with you all and even have a video interview where I talk about parts of the core science that makes all of this possible.

I can't be blamed for how this new science was received as it would seem that it's too late as the Naysayers word is taken over the word of someone that is actually experimenting on this technology in the real world. With the core science I can go into other areas this technology can branch off too. But after what happened to me on this site I don't feel like talking much these days as since this information is new it simply can't be looked up in the books we have on the shelves today and that is a problem for most that I share this information with. In the end I let the Naysayers win as there are in too deep now and it is clear that their word is taken to be as good as gold and mines as worthless trash.

Now I am just focusing my efforts on my work and pretty much choose to stay out of the loop these days. My advice to all of you is to make use of the scientific and engineering methods to aid your efforts at solving this technology:
http://www.sciencebuddies.org/science-fair-projects/project_scientific_method.shtml
https://sites.tufts.edu/eeseniordesignhandbook/2013/engineering-method/

I make use of them both and would strongly suggest all of you to do the same as from my experience this technology is the complete opposite of Dr. Faraday's electrolysis method.

Just make sure to get off of the drawing board and preform some real experiments and be prepared to fail as we learn most when we fail and if you are too afraid to fail you will more than likely never learn.

TGS

Ed only gets banned from the forums because he's the biggest 'know it all' out there. His head is so big he thinks he's getting banned because he knows it all.

Ed, we bow to you....and humbly await your Meyer wisdom if you are so loving as to share it with us!

Quote from: TGS on January 14, 2016, 21:55:40 pm

Quote from: electrotek on January 14, 2016, 21:30:08 pm

Quote from: TGS on January 14, 2016, 20:25:23 pm

I got banned from this site for wanting to talk about ionization

You didn't get "banned", only suspended for a month - you're still here.  And it was for posting about religion, not ionization.
 

Quote

and even you wanted me banned for consistently saying this technology is about ionization.

You are fabricating, pure and simple.  END OF DISCUSSION.

Steve do you care to enlighten this guy? as after all it was you who banned me back in 2008 for wanting to talk about the Gas Processor or was it something else?

(http://i1025.photobucket.com/albums/y320/h2opower/Picture888.jpg)

P.S. I was already banned when I designed and had these Gas Processors made.

Please dont toy with my intelligence here...
Its an attemp to proces gas.
I havent seen any evidence that yr setup is doing what you claim.
For sure it looks like what Meyer made.

Cheers

Bow all you want but you best bow to the most high YAH and not to any man as I am not worthy of such an honor. One thing I know is going to happen is I am not planning on sharing this information with any of you for you have let me know quite clearly you do not want this technology if it is to come from me. I show results no one else has even come close to showing and what do I get from practically all of you but childish disdain.

Another thing I have noticed is those that are in a position to clear my good name never do and that is a choice to do evil and not good. It's just as Meyer said, "Don't expect them to support you for they will not..." Trust me when I tell you this there is coming a time all of you are going to wish I was still in my naive sharing mode as I was when I started into this technology but thanks to all of you I was made to go it alone and pushed out of your little forums. You woke me up to the truth about the true meaning of "OPEN SOURCE" and it has nothing to do with helping humanity and all about competition, glory seeking, and greed.

Again I state the obvious in that no one has shown examples of themselves putting more voltage to the load than I have and that is a fact that practically all of you wish just wasn't true.
(http://i1025.photobucket.com/albums/y320/h2opower/personalpics009_zpscf31888c.jpg)

Quote from: TGS on January 14, 2016, 20:25:23 pm

I got banned from this site for wanting to talk about ionization

You didn't get "banned", only suspended for a month - you're still here.  And it was for posting about religion, not ionization.
 

Quote

and even you wanted me banned for consistently saying this technology is about ionization.

You are fabricating, pure and simple.  END OF DISCUSSION.

Steve do you care to enlighten this guy? as after all it was you who banned me back in 2008 for wanting to talk about the Gas Processor or was it something else?

(http://i1025.photobucket.com/albums/y320/h2opower/Picture888.jpg)

P.S. I was already banned when I designed and had these Gas Processors made.

Quote from: TGS on January 14, 2016, 10:41:54 am

I have been banned from more forums than most this sounds funny to me as I have been banned from this site, the energetic site, Max's site, the RWG site, and the all about circuits site.

The difference being that when YOU get banned it's a defensive measure to stop your determination to disrupt the other members' attempts to discuss something.  Nothing unrighteous about this kind of banning.

No, it's all out of jealousy as I can see it clearly now. I've been constantly getting high voltage to the load and no one seems to be able to do so other than myself and this causes problems. Sometimes I will read peoples results and can see they are still having problems getting high voltages to the load today. It's gotten so bad that they don't even want to talk about the subject anymore as 8.8kv seems way out of their reach at this moment in time and they have problem with me in that I am able to do so for they are only getting a little over 1kv most of the time to the load.

Others get jealous on the things that I can build like you in that you aren't able to build much of anything that remotely even resembles Meyer's technology. I got banned from this site for wanting to talk about ionization and even you wanted me banned for consistently saying this technology is about ionization. After it was proved you went mute on me but you are not alone as most that I see can't build or do the things I have shown everyone that I can do and this is a problem for them. It's been this way my whole life as I always seem to perform a task better than the next guy and for doing so they in turn become jealous of my abilities. I've been told to "slow my roll" as I was making everyone look bad by always solving problems no one else could solve which is my primary strength and is why I was able to actually figure out just how this technology truly works. And again just me saying that upsets people as they wish that something bad would happen to me to make me go away as after all isn't that what KWS sort-of said in a round about way in saying I don't deserve this technology and it shouldn't be me who figures it out?

Just look at all the comments on the 2013 Global BEM video and you can see a clear pattern of jealousy, envy, and disdain. The only well wishes I got for getting over 4kv to the load came from private parties for the most part. Then I talk about getting between 9.3-4kv to the load and again all I get is jealousy, envy, and disdain for my improved results of getting even higher voltages to the load. Support from any of the forums towards TGS for attempting to put out Meyer's technology to the market? None that I can see other than some private parties and a few friends. I may be on this site but I am still banned by it's members. People don't seem to like the truth much these days as the lie seems to be much more to their liking.