Generation of electricity by usage of moving magnetic fields
Started by unknown · · 45 posts · last reply 6 February 2010
-
#26 ·
The magnetic field will depend on the inductance and the current that is passing thru the water. and will be relatively small. the capacitance of the water would higher than the inductance so water behave as a capacitor...
Steve the pictures you upload shows how the thermal energy is obtained.
Stan explains that the oxygen missing 4 electrons ... being a big atom and positively charged (potential energy added) will want to stabilize and when the spark start the explosion (chain reaction) what happens is that oxygen missing electrons attracts the hydrogen that is relatively small and having only one electron, with more violence releasing thermal energy = to the impact of the atoms. The gain is in kinetic energy. Or heat. Theoretically this holds.
YEs to ionize the h2 is harder because its electron seats on the first orbital thus is very strong attracted by the nuclei.
If you use magnetic field you can slow down or raise the velocity spin of the electrons making it to come closer to the nuclei or far from the nuclei. laser energy can do it too in somehow. He says the nuclei absorbs energy, meyer pictures shows it... -
#27 ·
if you note the fig 6
the electrodes are drawn in a certain way witch in other patents are described as permanent magnets (with the lines in 45° inclination. And it indicates attracting force. If you look to all other drawings is the same. _The only different is the steam resonator ones...
So again something that talks to me and say he used magnetic electrodes (maybe)
-
#28 ·
i was just thinking. when stan ionized oxy into higher state this has to make the gas go into a more expanded state appearing as more in volume since if all the gas is potiviely charged and missing the balanceing electrons they have to repel more.. so if they repel more then when they do go to stablize they will have more of a collapse.. thermal energy is produced from the collapse of imbalance right??. -
#29 ·
I think wont expand that much if the energy goes into the oxygen as electrical attraction form if it was heated it would expand for sure. But being o2 or oo should not give very big difference.
The thermal energy comes from the burning. The gain comes from this greater attraction that creates a bigger impact.
If you would just heat the gas you would give it energy but it would have expansion and thus you could have less energy coming out from a motor as the density would be lower...
Anyway i think we should just focus now on the energy source for now.
The thermal energy he invented was to need less water to do the same work. But the energy to add this thermal energy to the water must come from somewhere and thats the subject of this thread.
Regards
Another source of energy is the heat produced on the engine. this could give us a better efficiency when leading with the work done by the movement of the gas...
I calculated to boil one liter of water you only need about 100 watts. So we need to understand well the expansion thing and how many energy it can create.
I was thinking on how to calculate the magnetic field per charged particle we could harvest but is very hard to work with some formulas Maxwell...
-
#30 · date not recorded
Yeh, those extended Maxwell formula's are terrible!
But back to the principle of ionizing HHO gas into whatever gas output, who probably can be paramagnetic.
Stan used a transformer (VIC) to create HV at certain frequency.
He used a specific space between his electrodes and the electrodes had a specific lenght.
So, i wanna try something.
Outertube: diam. 2.5cm
Innertube: diam. ? depends on how much HV (7kv?)(frequency?) and possible sparking. HHO conducts very good, so lots of space is needed. Maybe 1 cm space?
So, lets us build something
steve
-
#31 · date not recorded
Stan explains that the oxygen missing 4 electrons ... being a big atom and positively charged (potential energy added) will want to stabilize and when the spark start the explosion (chain reaction) what happens is that oxygen missing electrons attracts the hydrogen that is relatively small and having only one electron, with more violence releasing thermal energy = to the impact of the atoms. The gain is in kinetic energy. Or heat. Theoretically this holds.
YEs to ionize the h2 is harder because its electron seats on the first orbital thus is very strong attracted by the nuclei.
If you use magnetic field you can slow down or raise the velocity spin of the electrons making it to come closer to the nuclei or far from the nuclei. laser energy can do it too in somehow. He says the nuclei absorbs energy, meyer pictures shows it...
I still have my LEDS laser array, which cover 4 frequencys of the hydrogen atom....
Maybe we need some frequencys of the oxygen, because we want to shoot the electrons of them, is it.
Another question raise: If the oxygen atom looses 4 electrons, it still wants, maybe even more, to mount the hydrogen atom with his single electron.
What kind of molecule do we get? Some kind of instable water?
Steve -
#32 · date not recorded
Found some explanation:
Ionic bonding
Consider now a more difficult situation, one in which two different atoms compete for electrons. One example would be the case involving a sodium atom and a chlorine atom. If these two atoms come close enough to each other, both nuclei pull on all electrons of both atoms. In this case, however, a very different result occurs. The chlorine nucleus has a much larger charge than does the sodium nucleus. It can pull on sodium's electrons much more efficiently than the sodium nucleus can pull on the chlorine electrons. In this case, there is a winner in the battle: chlorine is able to pull one of sodium's electrons away. It adds that electron to its own collection of electrons. In a situation in which one atom is able to completely remove an electron from a second atom, the force of attraction between the two particles is known as an ionic bond.
Read more: Chemical Bond - examples, body, used, water, type, form, energy, system, oxygen, parts, History, Covalent bonding, Ionic bonding, Electronegativity, Polar and nonpolar bonds http://www.scienceclarified.com/Ca-Ch/Chemical-Bond.html#ixzz0eHsjkOIW
-
#33 · date not recorded
Atoms are the smallest individual units of an element that retain the chemical properties of that element. They contain protons, neutrons (in most cases), and electrons. By definition, all atoms are electrically neutral, meaning that they have the same number of protons as electrons. If an atom acquires an electric charge by gaining or losing one or more electrons, it's called an ion.
Ions are atoms that have gained or lost electrons. An atom that gains electrons acquires a negative charge and is called an anion (pronounced AN-eye-on). An atom that loses electrons acquires a positive charge and is called a cation (CAT-eye-on).
"Element" is an umbrella term for all of the atoms that have the same atomic number. For example, every atom that has 8 protons belongs to the element called oxygen. The term "isotope" is slightly more specific, referring not only to atoms that have the same atomic number, but also the same mass number. Oxygen-16 refers to every atom that has both 8 protons and 8 neutrons. Oxygen-17 is part of the same element as Oxygen-16 (and has the same number of protons) but is a different isotope because it has a different number of neutrons and therefore a different mass.
-
#34 · date not recorded
the reason why the hydrogen is rejected from bonding when they high energy state oxygen grabs the electron is because the proton mass of the oxy is repelling the proton mass of hydrogen while pulling the electron -
#35 · date not recorded
the reason why the hydrogen is rejected from bonding when they high energy state oxygen grabs the electron is because the proton mass of the oxy is repelling the proton mass of hydrogen while pulling the electron
Does it grap the electron, or does it make a bond?
-
#36 · date not recorded
i would say 8 proton oxy having only 4 electrons would hold electrons twice as close then a balanced oxy unless being acted on by an external force that will accelerate the orbital electrons to maintain a further orbit
the oxy tries to balance it self due to the fact its missing to many.. its all simple math.. 8 protons 8 electrons = 0 neutral.. 8 protons 4 electrons= +4 electrical electrical charge.... the oxy will not want the proton of hydrogen to amount to 9 protons and 5 electrons.. i will say that once hydrogen looses it electron oxy going from having 4 electrons to 5 it will appear to the hydrogen as +3 and will not interact with it until a chain reaction occurs.. water we know has 2 protons for hydrogen and 8 for electrons =10 so and has 10 electrons =0 net charge... the wounderful thing about water is its a dipolar and can be alligned between opposite polarity fields.. this means its able to be stableized while exciting into higher state which i believe is where u are oscillating the orbital electrons as stan calls particle oscillation.. just as if the moon was to speed up it would fall into further and further out orbits due to the fact that its speed and velocity is beating the gravitational attraction of earths density... right now you see maintream working on particle accelerators trying to make antimatter (real vacuum) there is density in all the universe even space.. light is a elementray particle therefore it is density.. to make a vacuum is to have the weight of the entire universe trying to concave it in.. they are focusing on accelerating higher densitys (protons) we are focusing on accelerating way smaller density called electrons.. which one seems easier to generate acceleration in a bigger mass or smaller? -
#37 ·
I think that watching to these two videos you are going to be able to understand what meyer meant by particle oscillation as energy generator. And probably how his gas got exited...
This principle can help us to understand how to accelerate the gas inside the epg. How to maintain it ionized and if you come back to resonance also how to do it economically... Remember that stan said that he multiplied the frequency by 2 so full wave bridge rectifier. For this case... I believe it can really work and that can be too dangerous so attention working on this...
http://techtv.mit.edu/videos/1049-conducting-ping-pong-ball-between-capacitor-plates
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndYrNn3EK28&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3omwHv3Cmog&feature=SeriesPlayList&p=C2CEECFD938FD494
-
#38 ·
If you remember the wave guides he shown WWWWWWWWWWW it is = to the movement of the ping pong ball
So basically the frequency of this wave (and acceleration of particles) will depend on the water or gas density spacing between the plates and the ion current that will flow. I see application for this only with the injector, steam resonator and or his hyperdrive technology. Don't believe it can do other than hot water in a cell under water...
I can be wrong...
It is useful in the epg and gas processor too.
-
#39 ·
If you remember the wave guides he shown WWWWWWWWWWW it is = to the movement of the ping pong ball
So basically the frequency of this wave (and acceleration of particles)
That is a most remarkable theory .
I have tought the same and that is the only possible wavelenght that can ever be even remotly related to a makeable size cell .
A tuning fork has their resonant wavelenght in the audio ranges in all makeable size cell , thats in air .
Roughly , matching an electrical signal to a stainless steel tube will have a propagation speed be a bit lower than speed of light . . Same for electromagnetic waves .
-
#40 ·
Yes dankie it is...
The acceleration of the particles depends on the voltage. I learned this when I studied about the photoelectric effect. And collision.
Basically An electron will gain kinetic energy when it fly towards a positive electric field. The gain in ev ( speed in meters per second) will be equal to the electric field voltage. It will gain 1 ev per volt in the electric field. Is like gravity acceleration (force) so ^2 squared.
I believe charged particles do the same but as they are atoms not only electrons they polarize second to the voltage field is close to it. I mean like the ping pong ball. When it charges positively its repelled by the positive field and attracted by the negative field, when it comes closer to the negative field it again change its polarity and is repelled by negative and attracted by the positive. As it have a bigger mass probably the acceleration will be less than 1ev per v. Will depend on the charge of the particle and its weight.
This would be the principle behind particle oscillation as energy generator
So i though time ago if i can accelerate the articles or electrons up to high ev i could ionize the oxygen like meyer said by collision.
To obtain free electrons i plained to use laser and a low working function electrode.
As i had no money to test this i didn't proceed to test it.
What i'm not sure is, if the electrons or charged particles touch the electrodes or the electric field, the voltage will discharge to some degree or not.
Stan stated an electric field could do work while not being consumed.
i don't know if the charged particle will change polarity when touch the electrode discharging it or if this transition of charge will happen like between the electrodes....
The wave guide stan showed us i believe that is the same as the particle movement during its travel in between the voltage zones. it goes like this because or of the movement of the flow of the gas or water or whatever he was using.
Now thinking about how could this work in true system we need to understand how many charges we need to have to do to achieve what he was doing. I think is a very big number from my calculations.
Charged particles are also influenced by magnetic field...
somewhere i read the particles would start to spin in a certain condition. Like a vortex that meyer showed. I don't remember where is the document (it was an university document).
so here some info on particle acceleration and a simulator very nice.
http://agni.phys.iit.edu/~vpa/dcacceleration.html
http://www.pelletron.com/tutor.htm
simulation:
http://phet.colorado.edu/simulations/sims.php?sim=Photoelectric_Effect
-
#41 ·
More very good info in this wapedia:
info is much better than wiki
http://wapedia.mobi/en/Particle_accelerator
http://wapedia.mobi/en/Ion_source
http://wapedia.mobi/en/Ozone
http://wapedia.mobi/en/Sonic_spray_ionization -
#42 ·
Its clear to me now what kind of system this really is , the phonon effect explained to me by an awesome professor with clear and beautiful notes . So this is what Stan meant by a resonant cavity , same as puharich . A hydrophone or a listening device is a very useful instrument for this project .
That video of the ping pong ball , the quotes from Stephen and Puharich , the ac , the alternating 3 phase triple tube setup , and this video makes it all come to light on what I should be looking for for maximum vibration . Still have many questions but I am norrowing it down . Its pretty easy to see why people people are hitting a wall . Low skills , extreme complexity and misleading information mixed together .
I will be dealing with this as a stricly acoustical device and deriving proper empirical studies and maximum power tuning from there .
-
#43 ·
nice that you enjoyed man wish you good lucky .
I'm not sure what the phonons can do to the gas but he clearly described that the velocity of sound in a gas depends on its temperature and its mass. Velocity in meters per second = square root of temperature/mass
in common air is 340 meters /second -
#44 ·
See that tuning video @ 42 minutes .
Here is an quote from Stan's brother .
Just as tuning fork rings when struck by a hammer , so does the waveguide elements immersed in hydroxyl generating liquid when struck by electrical signals from impedance matching circuits .
It looks to me as if there could be two oscillations here , the water acting as the ping pong ball , the tubes simply shaking @ a much lower frequency .
That 440 is like 4-5 inches long , speed in water is 1500 m/S . About 4.3 times faster
This means about a 16 inch long cell to match the wavelenght
-
#45 · date not recorded
http://www.artofhacking.com/IET/NEWTECH/live/aoh_puha1.htm
""In molecular dissociation one fork of 620 is used, setting
the chords on the first octave.
"In atomic separation two forks, one of 620 and one of 630
per second; setting the chords on the second octave.
"In the etheric three forks; one of 620, one of 630, and one
of 12,000, setting the chords on the third octave.
As a matter of further clarification, Keely states that you cannot
DIRECTLY dissociate a single level of aggregation due to the shell
structure of matter.
Page 2
In other words, if you wish to dissociate the Atomic level, you
must first dissociate the molecular to be able to get to the
atomic. That follows also if you wish to dissociate the etheric,
you must disrupt the molecular AND the atomic, THEN the etheric.
Keely refers to this technique as progressive dissociation.
"
br,
webmug
Sign in to reply, or ask for an account.