Skip to content
Stan’s Legacy

Attention Attention !!!!

Started by unknown · · 34 posts · last reply 25 March 2009

  1. Dankie

    #26 · date not recorded


    space-time= dont even try to talk like you udnerstand space time in mathematical concepts HAITHAR.


    Funny  ;D

  2. kinesisfilms

    #27 · date not recorded

    i'll be glad if anyone informs me if he has a working zero-point energy device, as long as that is not the case i'm out.

    actually he does.

    listen to the tom talks tesla interview from 9:39 on.....he names people that he works with in his group and what they have invented.

    your judging a person you don't know a thing about.

    im not sure what's more flawed...his quantum equation or your assumptions.

  3. Steve

    #28 · date not recorded

    much not physics related stuff
    what has being in the army to do with developing theories for our universe? that doesn't give him any credibility nor takes it. i dont care if anyone has a title or not as long as he is doing good research.

    and who would say that (space-)time is the same as energy? maybe someone can explain this.

    If a voltage spike can perform work, as Stan said, then what part would it tickle? It doesnt reach into the free floating waterclusters without current.

    stevie, if you do not believe that voltage under some circumstances can perform work, which is understandable, why do you put further effort into researching the meyer technology? or did you stop with that after you became aware of this thought?

    Good question. I wonder this my self many times.....
    My answer is that i keep an open mind on things that are unknown. Like, that it is strange that somebody is making statements, like Stan Meyer, in patents. Statements like vapourizing 5 gallons of water in a minute. He was granded a Patent on it. So he must have showed it. Of course it seems impossible to get that much of results with such a very small tubeset, btw. (I ran my tests. No matter how much power you put in that tube, you never get 5 gallons vapourized)

    But i gamble on 3 developments.
    I have improved electrolysis with a system that doesnt need chemicals. I run engines on that system.
    I do research on electrolysis with use of NOAH or KOH for comparison reasons.
    And the unknown technology's, like Meyer, Puharich and many many many others and of course some stuff that i do myself.

    I am curious from nature. If there is more outthere, i wanna know it.

    Oh, and before i forget:
    This forum helps me and the members to get idea's. To share idea's. Sometimes we have fights here. But thats ok. We are all the same. We are researchers. Each on our own levels. There is only 1 stupid question here. The question that is never asked.....

    So Haithar, please stay. Stay critical.

    Best regards
    Steve

  4. outlawstc

    #29 · date not recorded

    Quote
    Every oxygen atom is surrounded by 4 hydrogen atoms. If you build that into like a 3Dcluster, you see that it is practically impossible to get some kind of polarization in it.

    Since oxygen has a higher electronegativity than hydrogen, water is a polar molecule. The oxygen has a slight negative charge while the hydrogens have a slight positive charge giving the article a strong effective dipole moment. The interactions between the different dipoles of each molecule cause a net attraction force associated with water's high amount of surface tension.

    Electrons are not always shared equally between two bonding atoms: one atom might exert more of a force on the electron cloud than the other. This "pull" is termed electronegativity and measures the attraction for electrons a particular atom has. The unequal sharing of electrons within a bond leads to the formation of an electric dipole: a separation of positive and negative electric charge.

    water is a polar compound making it a dipole

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_molecule#Polar_molecules

    now when h2o is sitting next to it self it may hold a neutral cohesion between its neighboring compounds(h20) wheres it has the brick patter effect off consistancy like you say.. but because theres 4 next to the oxy they are not all bonded to the oxy.. only 2 per oxy..  stan said all you have to do to turn water to gas is get the water polarized and let the voltage take over and do work by voltage tickling and plucking electrons.  when the water dipoles line up in polarization its like you just formed a capacitor.!! a capacitor material inside is solid dipole material. why do you think some caps have one direction flow for cu.. its because the dipole materials inside are polarly aligned for capacitance


    outlawstc

  5. Steve

    #30 · date not recorded

    i'll be glad if anyone informs me if he has a working zero-point energy device, as long as that is not the case i'm out.

    actually he does.

    listen to the tom talks tesla interview from 9:39 on.....he names people that he works with in his group and what they have invented.

    your judging a person you don't know a thing about.

    im not sure what's more flawed...his quantum equation or your assumptions.

    Kinesisfilms,

    I found that document of Bearden very interesting to read. However. There is not much of body in it that proves something.
    I know the record of Mr Bearden and he deserves lots of respect. But if a person like Bearden is publishing such a doc, then i think its very thin.
    Then please show testresults. A real sciencetist proves statements with decent testresults. Mr. Bearden was such a scientist. Not sure if he has lost it somehow. Any professor at my old university will laugh on such a paper. Even my daughter must publish here testresults as prove of here statements in scienceclass.

    br
    Steve



  6. kinesisfilms

    #31 · date not recorded

    see you are judging bearden on this LOAN SINGLE document.....treat this document more so as a statement.....not a thesis.

    bearden elaborates in his books.

    he has written many books.

    this document is him just saying hey today something was discovered that will revolutionize our future.

    that is it. and nothing more.

    this is not his life's work in 6 pdf pages.

    so as for his proven statements....once again this is a short quick to the point pdf to give you a taste of what has been figured out.

    as always. he will most likely write a book on this.

    until then i suggest people understand the difference of short pdf's and concluded works.

    bearden has enough written concluded work to give this short pdf credibility.....and that is my point.

  7. Steve

    #32 · date not recorded

    Quote
    Every oxygen atom is surrounded by 4 hydrogen atoms. If you build that into like a 3Dcluster, you see that it is practically impossible to get some kind of polarization in it.

    Since oxygen has a higher electronegativity than hydrogen, water is a polar molecule. The oxygen has a slight negative charge while the hydrogens have a slight positive charge giving the article a strong effective dipole moment. The interactions between the different dipoles of each molecule cause a net attraction force associated with water's high amount of surface tension.

    Electrons are not always shared equally between two bonding atoms: one atom might exert more of a force on the electron cloud than the other. This "pull" is termed electronegativity and measures the attraction for electrons a particular atom has. The unequal sharing of electrons within a bond leads to the formation of an electric dipole: a separation of positive and negative electric charge.

    water is a polar compound making it a dipole

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_molecule#Polar_molecules

    now when h2o is sitting next to it self it may hold a neutral cohesion between its neighboring compounds(h20) wheres it has the brick patter effect off consistancy like you say.. but because theres 4 next to the oxy they are not all bonded to the oxy.. only 2 per oxy..  stan said all you have to do to turn water to gas is get the water polarized and let the voltage take over and do work by voltage tickling and plucking electrons.  when the water dipoles line up in polarization its like you just formed a capacitor.!! a capacitor material inside is solid dipole material. why do you think some caps have one direction flow for cu.. its because the dipole materials inside are polarly aligned for capacitance


    outlawstc



    The force of the H sitting on 1 oxygenatom towards the Oxygenatom from his neighbours is almost as big as the bonding to his own Oxy.
    Thats why water has such a strenght. Its because of the all attractions inside it.
    Please try to think in 3D.

    Please read my research:
    http://www.ionizationx.com/index.php/topic,602.0.html

    Just a small part of it:
    Each oxygen atom is typically surrounded by four hydrogens--two close ones from its own molecule, and two further away on nearby molecules
    The oxygen has a negative charge, and the hydrogens a bit more positive--a charge separation called a dipole.
    In water, the dipoles are already partially aligned. This without any applied voltage field
    Clusters of nearby molecules act as a single, larger dipole, enhancing the field more than they would on their own
    Each oxygen pulls the hydrogens further from the oxygen in neighboring molecules, which increases the charge separation within each molecule and therefore the strength of each molecule's individual dipole.

    I think we are not so far from eachother on this..

    Best regards
    Steve

  8. Dankie

    #33 · date not recorded

    i'll be glad if anyone informs me if he has a working zero-point energy device, as long as that is not the case i'm out.

    actually he does.

    listen to the tom talks tesla interview from 9:39 on.....he names people that he works with in his group and what they have invented.

    your judging a person you don't know a thing about.

    im not sure what's more flawed...his quantum equation or your assumptions.

    Kinesisfilms,

    I found that document of Bearden very interesting to read. However. There is not much of body in it that proves something.
    I know the record of Mr Bearden and he deserves lots of respect. But if a person like Bearden is publishing such a doc, then i think its very thin.
    Then please show testresults. A real sciencetist proves statements with decent testresults. Mr. Bearden was such a scientist. Not sure if he has lost it somehow. Any professor at my old university will laugh on such a paper. Even my daughter must publish here testresults as prove of here statements in scienceclass.

    br
    Steve





    Seriously , when was the last time we saw clear black on white scientific results of some OU device . Such accomplishements are never out in the open for you to see , this stuff is always very obscur . They are usually described and patented by the way they operate , results are NEVER published ... What are you expecting seriously ? Him to show you his machine , Here's my OU device , pulls energy from the vacuum , 1 watt in , 10 watts out .... BINGO ... Its never like that ...The COP factors you hear from of certain devices are mostly always coming from these sites like peswiki , rumored to have been ...

    I believe Stanley Meyers patents are simply a diversion , he presented this technology as if it relied on resonance and coventionnal understanding . But it relied in fact on very *obscur* science that is still not accepted by the scientific community , notice that non of his *state-space* stuff was never patented ... Conventionnal knowledge on all the patents ... Everything was made to appear to be , to mimic ...

    Anything that has to do with *scalar waves* would be a BIG NO NO for the patent office , automatic refusal .


    Also , we have a very BIG issue , an issue that simply cant be resolve . The water cannot hold a charge under any condition , it cant . And we know it wasnt done with a special coating .


    But what if the charge is not coming from our physical dimension ( this is already accepted science )  .

    My hypothesis takes this into account and connects the dots perfectly , no anomaly anywhere , connected heavily to other proven technology , universe follows this science , dna and cells follows this science .

    I dont care about none of your past experiments , IN FACT , you never even posted any values for us to try to ponder on your system , you ACTED LIKE ...














  9. outlawstc

    #34 ·

    Quote
    Also , we have a very BIG issue , an issue that simply cant be resolve . The water cannot hold a charge under any condition , it cant . And we know it wasnt done with a special coating .

    do we need the water to take on charge?  or do we need the atoms to be effected by electrical forces of opposition..
    lets just say if i was a electron i would most likey want to fall to earth.. but if i were a proton i would want to fall to the sky. lighting is the transfer of electrons to ground.. but what causes this sudden burst of potential transfer??? the build up of exsessive electrons in the cloud?  until it reaches a potential high enough to jump right? does a cloud dipole orient its self to where all positive are facing up and negtive down.. just like   a cap.??? does that huge mass of evaporated water capacitace extra eletron in it because it is a positive 2 charge? 


    outlawstc

Sign in to reply, or ask for an account.