Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors

#26 · date not recorded

this is bob koontz on coast to coast 6-6-09

Coast to Coast - Jun 06 2009 - Hour 2.mp3

#27 · date not recorded

Quote

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

this is a saying i like to say.. many people may step outside the box, but most people will stand next to it.. minus well just install a window..
the mind must go into the cloud of dreams to find answers/ or questions.. to do so you must venture off from the box.

my point here is no one should ever restrict the mind.. to a narrow perspective/ or a confined perspective of thought... i know you mean well and this stuff is tuff.. you have to have a very creative mind along with knowledge to paint this portrait that is defiant to the prior art..

this is what i think scalar waves are made from high voltage canceling waves drumming (pulsing) the cell... its not electrons crossing from plate to plate making amps in the water, that method is the chaos method (non harmonic) you are forcing the over population of electrons through the water, the waters electrons are having colisions with the passing electron creating friction (heat) and is removing them in a war type manner ... that is electrolysis and is what we dont want.. yes stan uses amps but it doesnt mean that the activity of amps is in the chokes, secondary and cell... it is in the primary... the primary drives the core.. the core transfers to the others through emf.. the opposite from electrolysis would be harmonic... harmonic is dealing with timing and balance.. pos and neg working togetther.. you really need to see the laws of attraction at work when you have the skin effect drumming voltage (physical process) into the water.. as if when the voltage amplitude is jumping the skin effect fields are acting like a speakers cone producing waves.... the skin effect fields are applying physical forces (pusing and pulling) at a individual atomic level of interaction.. so it is just like a speakers vibrations but requires no moving parts...just moving and changing fields...

Quote

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

to get a 70 pound bowling ball to float in the air john hutchinson built 2 tesla coils around 1mega volt.. then faced them in opposition to each other.. the same idea of stans fields across the cell. .. i would say he had them place with one below and one above.. i would also say the bowling ball was manifesting its electrons to either top or bottom and for a moment in time had its own north and south poles just like earth..

outlawstc

#28 · date not recorded

here are the other 2 bob koontz

Coast to Coast - Jun 06 2009 - Hour 3.mp3 Coast to Coast - Jun 06 2009 - Hour 4.mp3

Steve

#29 · date not recorded

Outlaw,

Please do not restric the free thinking potential. That was not what i wanna say. Go on. I only want to say, that most of all processen with coils end up being basic electrolysis.

I just think that many researchers are mixing 2 techics and that doesnt work.
1 = greating HHO gas
2= ionization of the HHO

Steve

Dankie

#30 · date not recorded

thx outlaw

outlawstc

#31 · date not recorded

Quote

I just think that many researchers are mixing 2 techics and that doesnt work.
1 = greating HHO gas
2= ionization of the HHO

balance is the key.. i really think people cant grasp that oposite voltage in the chokes is magneticaly attracted to each other with intent of motive force to equalize the electrons present in a material, so when they sit next to each other on the some core but are insulated to where they cant exhange, they want to stay on the core... a magnetic force between the 2 keep them there.. but they have to be balanced opposites for it to work.. if not you get electron flow.... with balance charges on the same core it is more work to cross the water.. so instead the potential will exist in the plates giving the skin effect... .think about how stan doenst get a arc with 40 kv in a injector.. the charge is happy on the core in separation.. arks only happen with discharge,, discharge is current...

WaytoGo

#32 · date not recorded

Meyer was very good, no doubt about it . But we can do this again i am sure.

We know Meyers cell was cold to the touch so maybe

we should aim for a cold process now, all i have personally done so far is pretty much a hot prosess and that is just electrolysis and notting worth chare.

If you have a cold process then you are on the first Meyer level i guess..

Radiant_1

#33 · date not recorded

@Waytogo
Yes...electrolysis is "HOT" because electrons are being crammed into the water creating friction...which creates heat. Meyer's process doesn't allow electrons in....instead he "POTENTIALIZES" the water's electrons and then provides an energy "sink" for them. So it's cool because electrons are leaving!!!

handyandy

#34 · date not recorded

I found this link at panaceauniversity.org:

http://www.powerlabs.org/flybackdriver.htm

I've seen patents of stan's where there's a center tap on the secondary with a diode and another coil perhaps where the pickup and feedback is taking place.

Regards,
Andy

Steve

#35 · date not recorded

Quote from: Radiant_1 on June 09, 2009, 19:34:39 pm

@Waytogo
Yes...electrolysis is "HOT" because electrons are being crammed into the water creating friction...which creates heat. Meyer's process doesn't allow electrons in....instead he "POTENTIALIZES" the water's electrons and then provides an energy "sink" for them. So it's cool because electrons are leaving!!!

Well, thats the myth of Stan.........
My 10 tube cell stayd cool too when it ran on the alternator.

Steve

Radiant_1

#36 · 10 Jun 2009

@Steve
It's no myth, and, is clearly laid out for all to read and understand...even Naudin notes the adiabatic flow of charge...see also adiabatic ionization

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

Dankie

#37 · 10 Jun 2009

Steve , stop being so negative in my threads .

Here is a cool video .

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

Steve

#38 · 10 Jun 2009

Quote from: Dankie on June 10, 2009, 03:02:35 am

Steve , stop being so negative in my threads .

Here is a cool video .

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

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

Steve

Steve

#39 · 10 Jun 2009

Quote from: Radiant_1 on June 10, 2009, 02:34:46 am

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

Hi radiant,

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

Steve

Steve

#40 · 10 Jun 2009

Quote from: Dankie on June 10, 2009, 03:02:35 am

Here is a cool video .

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

nice video, btw

Alan

#41 · date not recorded

Quote from: Dankie on June 09, 2009, 00:05:43 am

what would happen to the lower transitor ?

Blow up ?

I'd put the gate frequency on the enable pin of the primary frequency 555, to prevent crosstalk.

outlawstc

#42 · date not recorded

Quote

Steve , stop being so negative in my threads .

Here is a cool video .

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

@ dankie

endothermic and exothermic is what i mean when i say harmonic and non harmonic.... in my past posts

endothermic = harmonic exothermic = non harmonic..

imagine a tornado and its flows of energy...

for energy such as winds that are spiraling up and out the top of the tornado they are radiating in a expansive manner. that is non harmonic.. (loud/ destructive)

for energy such as wind to spiral down and compress into the tornado from the top down into the bottom is harmonic (silent/ creating)

harmonic energy is what drives the growth of forest and life.. i would say the silent harmonic energy that drives growth is sunlight.

Radiant_1

#43 · date not recorded

Quote

Hi radiant,

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

Steve

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

I rest my case

P.S.
I belonged to a skype water fuel chat group...and, I purposed the insulated electrode WAY before Naudin ever did it. I had VERY heated discussions with the head of Energeticforum (before there was an energeticforum) over this exact issue....it ended with him saying "I said this to begin with"

Then a couple months later Naudin tried it out...it is by no way HIS theory...neither is it MINE...it was my interpretation of various things Stan said + my own understanding of how you get voltage to do work w/o amp leakage.
As for your replication of Naudin and "knowing" it was leaking amps....your setup was NOT Naudins...and, he definitely showed an increase in capacitor action...if it leaked, that's fine....it still shows step charging and increase of overall charge. However, even Naudin's replication is not perfect...he only reached 1Kv...Stan notes around 16-20Kv!!

Dankie

#44 · date not recorded

I agree , Naudin dont give a crap about hiding anything from you .

He already replicated multiple OU technologies .

Now stop being so negative . This skeptical stuff is getting on my nerves .

Steve

#45 · 11 Jun 2009

Quote from: Radiant_1 on June 10, 2009, 21:16:42 pm

Quote
Hi radiant,

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

Steve

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

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

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

Dankie: i just send you a PM.

Steve

Radiant_1

#46 · 11 Jun 2009

Very cool...but I bet NOT ONE OF YOU HAD AN EEC!

Quote

Of course we seen hv and capacitance and resonance

If you have seen this...then the electrical stress MUST be translated across the water gap too (EEC works here)...
And as for the proof you speak of...I myself would also love to see some of your replication of Naudin

(if it's on the forum somewhere I would love for you to show me)

Steve

#47 · date not recorded

Quote from: Radiant_1 on June 11, 2009, 11:44:14 am

Very cool...but I bet NOT ONE OF YOU HAD AN EEC!
Quote
Of course we seen hv and capacitance and resonance
If you have seen this...then the electrical stress MUST be translated across the water gap too (EEC works here)...
And as for the proof you speak of...I myself would also love to see some of your replication of Naudin (if it's on the forum somewhere I would love for you to show me)

Here you are:
http://www.ionizationx.com/index.php/topic,467.0.html

The EEC Electrojolt and i made was not involved in these tests.

Steve

Alan

#48 · date not recorded

voltage collapsed through the water, at least you know amps were inhibited properly.

electrojolt

#49 · date not recorded

Quote from: Steve on June 11, 2009, 14:33:31 pm

Quote from: Radiant_1 on June 11, 2009, 11:44:14 am
Very cool...but I bet NOT ONE OF YOU HAD AN EEC!
Quote
Of course we seen hv and capacitance and resonance
If you have seen this...then the electrical stress MUST be translated across the water gap too (EEC works here)...
And as for the proof you speak of...I myself would also love to see some of your replication of Naudin (if it's on the forum somewhere I would love for you to show me)

Here you are:
http://www.ionizationx.com/index.php/topic,467.0.html

The EEC Electrojolt and i made was not involved in these tests.
Steve

Yes Steve and I worked on testing Naudin's Setup and we did replicate the same effect. The effect is: you have a semi-insulated cell, that gives you higher resistance, allowing to measure higher voltage across the electrodes, as current leaks from the insulation gaps, you see bubbles (electrolysis) and makes you think: Yehhhh I'm using voltage potential, Yehhhh, but then you measure how much gas it is making and compare that to straight DC and you realize that straight DC is more efficient. or Same power used in DC with more gas output.

But if most of you blind believers did some real testing you would know this by now.

Radiant_1

#50 · date not recorded

No offense Steve...but, I read nothing of any resonance, you said you needed a bigger tube because your circuit couldn't reach 300Khz. I see no successful replication at all. Maybe you have talked to others that have...but, I would like to see proof.
Here's the difference Steve, I try and decipher a rather mysterious patent...I use my reading comprehension coupled with my knowledge of physics and electrical effects to hypothesize how it's operating. We know voltage potential is suppose to do work...we know that there is suppose to be IONIZED GAS....we know that AMPS ARE INHIBITED...I know how electricity REALLY works...and the "Poynting Flow" or voltage phenomena is the driving force, and that it's energy manipulates electrons and anti-electrons (Or whatever the counter flow is)....so I put the equation together and see it working in my mind....I offer MY OPINION!

You on the other hand are trying to tell us all "As a matter of fact" that it's a myth and that Naudin failed and it was just amps leaking...you say

Quote

Of course we seen hv and capacitance and resonance

, yet when you show your replication you have no such thing. So, I ask you...why do you speak from authority, saying "it's a myth...it's amp leakage making bubbles"?...when clearly you are skipping the whole basis of my interpretation!

If you make a perfect capacitor (even a good yet slightly leaky one)...just charging it will only create minimal gas...once charged YOU MUST RE-ROUTE THE CHARGE...disconnected from load so you don't create an energy sink that would draw more amps on the primary wire (this is the gating time of Meyer's system)...the charge is on the plates...AND ACROSS THE WATER/DIELECTRIC...you should read up on HOW to make ionized gas if you think my mode of operation is a "The Myth of Meyer"