New video: Edward Mitchel

#26 · 5 Aug 2015

well you have right to believe what you want i'm happy with you being someone with good intentions, you are welcome to the forum.. and to believe whatever you can...

in the last link he is comparing meyer to a photosynthesis, that is interesting...but you tell me... if this is not a guess work what i'm Einstein? no... eintein also was guess worker.. just a joke

Nobody who creates ignore lists will ever lead you in the right direction, even less if they had a direction, not even God support this haha.

i would also be really happy to see even Lex Luther driving the water car =)

i don't care about things of the past i do think people can be better... even mr h20p

Of course if we send light our reaction will get favored but is not the light that breaks the bound, this is totally out of question.. according to my theory.. hopefully in the end who puts it to work will prove to be correct.. .

photositesis is a catalyzed reaction not our case... although a catalyzer could indeed be helpful or not..

sebosfato

#27 · 5 Aug 2015

yes meyer uses voltage... you are on a nice way

always good to ask the right question

if you ionize water big current flow... thats electrolysis does too..

meyer didn't broken the water he turn the covalent bound force off

i'm looking at it at totally scientific way.. how he did it!

i went to study the university of physics just to try seeing if i could understand him... but i also started on wiki and mit opencourseware..

i hope we can contribute somehow to this desperate planet..

remember plants are plants.. . we also need to drink water for our cells to keep going..

but meyer talk about voltage

lets put in this way, in my point of view, is totally different from ionization, the covalent switch off... thats in my scientific view of it... it could also be distorted.

i don't think the your post resume any science... its just lot of ideas... very short thinking

i thought of that too i get platinum and palladium here to sell if you want.. i don't want to use..

electrotek

#28 · date not recorded

I agree no one should be ignored. Anyone might have some little thing which is important. It is the off topic which should be ignored. More so if off topic is to distract or misdirect or clutter. Off topic is ignore in reverse. Some say too much "ignore yours, here is mine". Even copy long messages from their own thread, instead of giving a simple link, with only a short discussion. Which may still be off topic to the other's thread. This should be ignored.

TGS

#29 · date not recorded

Quote from: electrotek on August 05, 2015, 18:42:12 pm

I agree no one should be ignored. Anyone might have some little thing which is important. It is the off topic which should be ignored. More so if off topic is to distract or misdirect or clutter. Off topic is ignore in reverse. Some say too much "ignore yours, here is mine". Even copy long messages from their own thread, instead of giving a simple link, with only a short discussion. Which may still be off topic to the other's thread. This should be ignored.

I don't understand this post. Do you or do you not want this technology and just who is being ignored?

sebosfato

#30 · date not recorded

Quote from: TGS on August 05, 2015, 21:33:29 pm

Quote from: electrotek on August 05, 2015, 18:42:12 pm
I agree no one should be ignored. Anyone might have some little thing which is important. It is the off topic which should be ignored. More so if off topic is to distract or misdirect or clutter. Off topic is ignore in reverse. Some say too much "ignore yours, here is mine". Even copy long messages from their own thread, instead of giving a simple link, with only a short discussion. Which may still be off topic to the other's thread. This should be ignored.

I don't understand this post. Do you or do you not want this technology and just who is being ignored?

I believe you have it... so what is preventing you to show your tremendous ionization device to the world?

i think i know... just ideas won't light a lamp...

if you tried what you are writing or even got a look into books on how this can be done you will see that what meyer accomplish i against the laws of nature... is not something nature is allowed to do otherwise by today there would be no water buddy... but we are..

i'm not saying its not possible to ionize and all i'm just saying that your talking thru your hat without nothing to show... and still want to have done the last correct regard... and its being like like this since 10 years so far i remember...

dont worry.. i also have my own ignorance to deal with..

i don't want to ignore anyone... i believe the more people i have with me the better will be... of course if someone does not have the correct polarity will be naturally repelled.. in this forum respect is the only bottom line, you can have your space, post your posts... discuss your theory... we will be here to take a look and give you a feedback... but remember when we put our theory in game we need to be able to play the game and recognize where we did wrong otherwise we can't develop nothing good for us we just keep the opinion part which is irrelevant. For me opinion is not science... when i give you mine is not science..

i didn't put my theory on open yet totally because i'm still not willing to share it... it took a long almost 10 years for me to put it here and whatever big company just take it away....

so don't hope to find me posting that in that way... i will only be here as a researcher instigating questioning...

I'm not here trying to take you out of your way, i think your way could bring us something new.. so i don't want anybody copying i want alternatives.. thinkers... scientists to work with...

i developed my science all because of this project, and i guess is the case for most.. so is no good if i tell you do this and that// i better that you learn as much as i did... i never want to give out anything digested ask around.

electrotek

#31 · 6 Aug 2015

Quote from: TGS on August 05, 2015, 21:33:29 pm

Quote from: electrotek on August 05, 2015, 18:42:12 pm
I agree no one should be ignored. Anyone might have some little thing which is important. It is the off topic which should be ignored. More so if off topic is to distract or misdirect or clutter. Off topic is ignore in reverse. Some say too much "ignore yours, here is mine". Even copy long messages from their own thread, instead of giving a simple link, with only a short discussion. Which may still be off topic to the other's thread. This should be ignored.

I don't understand this post. Do you or do you not want this technology and just who is being ignored?

You're ignoring what I said at our other forum, about why I DO want the technology. (ie, Something which WORKS - not just someone's "original ideas", as you call it. And you're also ignoring what you just quoted me as saying: "No one" (meaning YOU) "should be ignored". That's all I'm going to say about this; I have IMPORTANT things I'm spending my time on.

sebosfato

#32 · 6 Aug 2015

wish you good luck.. for the record i got up to 50kv on the exciters and more than 3kv across each cell.. by the way reaching high voltages is not a problem..

sebosfato

#33 · date not recorded

i don't have a differential probe they one i wanted to buy costed a lot and when i was going to buy i was waiting to get some more money together, than the dollar value here in brazil went from 2,7to 3,3 since here we pay more 70% over for import what you pay, it became impossible to me to buy with the money i got... so far is in my top wish list.. a dp20k

i only have a 40kv probe and a true rms dc+ac DMM

and labview to monitor the impedance, voltage, current, temperature.. and frequencies applied..

my lab here at home have more feature than few labs in my university..

so i only can get voltage from ref point..

the waveforms in my oscilloscope are very hard to see because its old and is just an unconnected probe...

i can make many many many types of wave forms that you would say yeas now your doubling frequency.. tripling.. halving... so its pointless to show a waveform without water being split.... i'm going thru all of them..

my cell is just standard 11 cell in delrin.. ,

for the record i can light fluorescent bulbs without touching anything... wireless

i can draw big arcs to insulated metal connected to nothing.. i think that is high voltage... so the problem is not the high voltage as i tried to explain my view.. i can be wrong..

sebosfato

#34 · date not recorded

if we plant arrogance we won't harvest affection...

So if you are saying i'm not a scientist nor anyone else... just you.. where are you tables..? graphs? theory? why are you here?

You know what? i'm not curious... but you should stop disrespecting people... this will never help you.

Sorry to disappoint you but you took so long to get this far not because of scientific method...its because you didn't knew (know) science... nor me nor you nor many out there for a time, don't forget but you are the people you-re talking about. I bet you don't know calculus well too.. nor me... but is not my function to tell you that... i'm just showing how cool is being disrespectful..

i wil repeat just one time because you seem to not understood.. this place is here and we this open community that comes here to share thoughts and wishes, don't want free attacks ok. we don't have time for that.. we don't need that.. i know many people hate ed mitchell for things he did and say in the past so far i think you are him... h2o power.. .i really don't care... but if you keep with that bad attitude you had in the past .. people naturally will keep ignoring what you say.. this is the reality..

i repeat again i have nothing against anyone... no one should in my mind... however

if you are not willing to contribute anyhow but repeating how your correct and other don't, please be a lurker... hope you learn a lot here..

Quote from: TGS on August 06, 2015, 22:11:44 pm

This is the problem with people working on this technology they don't do things in a scientific manor. They claim things they haven't done which according to the form rules is out of bounds. You simply can not see what is taking place at the cell without a differential probe and each of the probes comes with a +/-% error so that all of the error calculations can be done.

People like to belittle my work by saying it is easy to place a high voltage potential difference across a water fuel cell as they can do it all day but they haven't done anything as all of their experiments have only taken place in their minds or they are assuming far too much. The scientific method demands that we make no assumptions and do things properly at all times. This is why it has taken me so long to get to this point as I had to save to be able to have the things that I do as there is simply no other way if one is to do things by the book. We can not accept guess work unless that guess work is being done with the use of the scientific method as then it requires one to answer the questions they pose by experimentation. This is exactly what I have been doing for the past nine years so to have someone belittle my work isn't going to go unchecked.

To Steve,

I have lived up to my promise and gave the science behind this technology away. I am not sure if I will post a video as now I am treading on deadly ground as all those that have shown their work are dead now so I must be wise in my actions from this point forwards. People are free to tell others I haven't given them anything but I caution everyone that the industry is out there with paid personnel trying very hard to lead people away from the truth. They say all kinds of demotivating thoughts to stop people from ever trying. In the video for which this thread was started I made a mistake in how I hooked up the transformers to each other and here I went and corrected that mistake: http://aetherforce.com/inventors-diary-* -good-use-of-the-scientific-method/
I tell and show quite a bit in that post. The things I show have never been talked about before concerning this technology as I ignored everyone and just kept to the scientific method and listened to what the experiments were showing me. I also got help from above and I am very thankful to YAH for that help as I would have never figured out the connection to photosynthesis if it had not been for his help so all the glory goes to him.

You are now going to have a lot of people coming to challenge what has been shown to everyone here and you all must fact check them as to if they are really performing experiments properly and are making use of the scientific method. It is not acceptable to just say with words and then have nothing to back up those words they must show their work and you are to be critical of their work. It is not acceptable to show an idea and have a lot of people like that idea and then the idea becomes law. Ask what they are measuring with or to see scope shots showing their wave forms. Ask them to see the devices they are using and compare them to those that Meyer built. You will find that a lot of people have questions but very few have answers to those questions. You all have fact checked me quite a bit over the years and each time I have shown you what I am doing. I have shown everyone the equipment I am testing with as well as the items I built for testing on. You all have done your due diligence on me many times over and you must do that to everyone working on this technology. If they say they are producing gas then ask them for MMW numbers and if they refuse then simply stop listening to them trust me it is as easy as that. If you see them doing something Meyer did not do then ask them to explain why they made the changes. If you see their work doesn't look anything like Meyer's work just ignore them as simply putting Meyer's name on the title of their thread isn't good enough.

All of you have been very hard on me over the years and I thank you for that as it shows me that I was making a difference that people felt like talking about. Now the burden is on you to build things for yourself and follow the science I have shown to the best of you abilities to do so. I have done what I promised I would do so now it's up to you to further your own work given all that I have shown you. I hope to see many others in the future getting high voltages to their cells and more to the point getting there work to the market place so that the public can have access to it and the change can begin towards ending the worlds dependence on fossil fuels.

Please do not ask me for my design work as you simply are not going to get it. Build and design your own as you might do a better job than I did which is giving the world a better product as a result and trust me I am fine with that.

electrotek

#35 · 7 Aug 2015

The part I don't get is that Ed keeps repeating that he's not willing to do the 'get bumped off' part of it, and has said that even if he does get it working, he "won't tell a soul". (Dem be da rules.")

Why does he expect us to do what he won't?

sebosfato

#36 · 7 Aug 2015

i do not really know, i can tell for me... if i discovered something, i would invite you to come over here in brazil to see, but would not post here on open, not initially... to totally impede this sort of behavior., (someone come and say oh i said this and that) bla la la .. i guess this makes clear that we are here to work and share thought and results not to show how good we are.. we are here to be together...

i hope all you will get together when whichever of us make it work..

thats what matter for me..

in the end this thread was created to appreciate your work..

i would be very proud if someone were taking about me somewhere... hope talking good =D

sebosfato

#37 · 7 Aug 2015

Ok ... sorry for any bad comments regarding you.. although i don't have any responsibility on your conduct and others.. and probably "that" caused this sort of comments.. i suggest pass the eraser and start over...

I try to remember everyday that until i prove the theory i'm working on, its useless, it won't help anyone else if i didn't proved any part of it before talking about... i fell for you is not the same.. you talk abut this truth without perceiving that its not the true is your point of view... an infinitesimal point. like mine.. like any other that don't show a working system. just words... that being said... i suggest to you and this will be good to you open your eyes on your behavior it will certainly make you open the doors of your perception. Imagine your theory is wrong! every day! if you can't find anything wrong test it.. if it didn't work it was wrong somewhere do you agree? If you can't explain to your self what is wrong you can't tell others with sure that one or other thing is missing because this is the principle of unobtainium... so again assuming to ourselves we are not the truth keepers is good! thats why scientists can't believe god because if they do they wait god to give them the hard work.. and it will never do.. although god can keep you living your life if you want to see it that way...

I totally disagree that i can't do anything good because i don't have one equipment or the other, i believe i know what i'm doing and from what i can see i can set up a multimeter on the cell and it will have the same effect as your equipment, but i just can't see the wave form across the cell, only numbers...(well i got a very good one and seems good enough) but as i know what i'm doing seeing at the oscilloscope the waveforms of other parts is enough to understand whats going on. sure i would like to get one...

i don't think is a good idea to make 100's of people buying one... because the hho community is very big and many does not even know what is doing yet what is the meaning of seeing what is not yet understood.

another way would be to simply get the oscilloscope feed with an isolation transformer... however the chassi of the oscilloscope will provide some grounding effect... so yet resistors could be useful..

when i see something i can't get, i just think a way to get around and get what i really need.

i'm curious about what you have to say about the switching diode...

Steve

#38 · date not recorded

Quote from: TGS on August 06, 2015, 22:11:44 pm

This is the problem with people working on this technology they don't do things in a scientific manor. They claim things they haven't done which according to the form rules is out of bounds. You simply can not see what is taking place at the cell without a differential probe and each of the probes comes with a +/-% error so that all of the error calculations can be done.

People like to belittle my work by saying it is easy to place a high voltage potential difference across a water fuel cell as they can do it all day but they haven't done anything as all of their experiments have only taken place in their minds or they are assuming far too much. The scientific method demands that we make no assumptions and do things properly at all times. This is why it has taken me so long to get to this point as I had to save to be able to have the things that I do as there is simply no other way if one is to do things by the book. We can not accept guess work unless that guess work is being done with the use of the scientific method as then it requires one to answer the questions they pose by experimentation. This is exactly what I have been doing for the past nine years so to have someone belittle my work isn't going to go unchecked.

To Steve,

I have lived up to my promise and gave the science behind this technology away. I am not sure if I will post a video as now I am treading on deadly ground as all those that have shown their work are dead now so I must be wise in my actions from this point forwards. People are free to tell others I haven't given them anything but I caution everyone that the industry is out there with paid personnel trying very hard to lead people away from the truth. They say all kinds of demotivating thoughts to stop people from ever trying. In the video for which this thread was started I made a mistake in how I hooked up the transformers to each other and here I went and corrected that mistake: http://aetherforce.com/inventors-diary-* -good-use-of-the-scientific-method/
I tell and show quite a bit in that post. The things I show have never been talked about before concerning this technology as I ignored everyone and just kept to the scientific method and listened to what the experiments were showing me. I also got help from above and I am very thankful to YAH for that help as I would have never figured out the connection to photosynthesis if it had not been for his help so all the glory goes to him.

You are now going to have a lot of people coming to challenge what has been shown to everyone here and you all must fact check them as to if they are really performing experiments properly and are making use of the scientific method. It is not acceptable to just say with words and then have nothing to back up those words they must show their work and you are to be critical of their work. It is not acceptable to show an idea and have a lot of people like that idea and then the idea becomes law. Ask what they are measuring with or to see scope shots showing their wave forms. Ask them to see the devices they are using and compare them to those that Meyer built. You will find that a lot of people have questions but very few have answers to those questions. You all have fact checked me quite a bit over the years and each time I have shown you what I am doing. I have shown everyone the equipment I am testing with as well as the items I built for testing on. You all have done your due diligence on me many times over and you must do that to everyone working on this technology. If they say they are producing gas then ask them for MMW numbers and if they refuse then simply stop listening to them trust me it is as easy as that. If you see them doing something Meyer did not do then ask them to explain why they made the changes. If you see their work doesn't look anything like Meyer's work just ignore them as simply putting Meyer's name on the title of their thread isn't good enough.

All of you have been very hard on me over the years and I thank you for that as it shows me that I was making a difference that people felt like talking about. Now the burden is on you to build things for yourself and follow the science I have shown to the best of you abilities to do so. I have done what I promised I would do so now it's up to you to further your own work given all that I have shown you. I hope to see many others in the future getting high voltages to their cells and more to the point getting there work to the market place so that the public can have access to it and the change can begin towards ending the worlds dependence on fossil fuels.

(http://i1025.photobucket.com/albums/y320/h2opower/IMG_4515_zpsf51b3189.jpg)

Please do not ask me for my design work as you simply are not going to get it. Build and design your own as you might do a better job than I did which is giving the world a better product as a result and trust me I am fine with that.

Hi Edward,

I must say that i admire your dedication for this waterfuel project.
You and i and some others, are still trying to get this Meyer techno to work.
Feel free to start any discussions and also to share some parts of your work, if you want to.
I have no problems with you having a company or if you want to sell some items, related to the waterfuel technology.

As always, i ask everybody here to play it fair and kind. There is room enough here for everybody's opinions and theorys.
I trully hope that one day, somebody succeeds and also shares the techno for the better good of the world.
I am almost 50 years old now. A grant dad as well. Should we not leave a cleaner world behind?
In the meanwhile, i hope that everybody enjoys the techno trip we all take.

Cheers

Steve

sebosfato

#39 · 8 Aug 2015

I rest my case...

electrotek

#40 · date not recorded

According to Wikipedia, presenting information compiled from reliable external sources, a differential probe is used to measure changing voltages, not the static potential built up on the cell, due to the charging pulses. This static potential, after it's there, can be measured with a VOM.

And you're completely ignoring the fact that he said he got the hv after turning one of the chokes around, which is exactly what you keep saying that no one listens to you about.

electrotek

#41 · 9 Aug 2015

If I have any questions for you I'm humble enough to ask, as I do value some of your input. But don't expect this to happen very often.

And what is my Ball Lightning theory that you keep mentioning? I've told you a few times now that I'm not using the BL, only the energy generated by that circuit. But then, you just said yourself that you ignore what I say.

I've specifically shown that my exotic energy can be produced with a dielectric sheet placed between two coils, exactly the same as the insulating barriers between Stan's multiple chokes. And that this energy has a repulsive effect on non charged liquid water. Get it?

electrotek

#42 · 9 Aug 2015

VOM refers to a Volt/Ohm Meter. It can even be used to estimate capacitance, based on how fast the needle swings, compared to a reference value component.

The Ball Lightning post was introductory, as it shows I can, in fact, produce the needed exotic energy. I'm one of a very few people in the world who have produced Ball Lightning, and I understand the energy. More importantly, I know how to use that energy, apart from the BL itself. So please remember that's what my Meyer work is about - exotic energy's effect on water. And, more importantly, why I think Meyer's hardware can produce this energy. He just doesn't show everything.

I didn't say I'm humble towards you, only that I have that characteristic. Einstein said that ego is reciprocal to amount of knowledge. You?

sebosfato

#43 · 9 Aug 2015

quote from edd talking behind my back on this post somewhere non related to this discussion...

What case? Me calling you out in what you told the group was a lie or a gross assumption that is totally unfounded by facts? I quote, "for the record i got up to 50kv on the exciters and more than 3kv across each cell.. by the way reaching high voltages is not a problem.." This is what you wrote and it is not truthful and you don't care of the damage you are doing to the technology by saying things like this just to save face.

I just pointed out there is no way you got the voltages you are claiming here as you simply don't have the proper equipment to be able to tell what voltages you are getting to your exciter array. You say, "by the way reaching high voltages is not a problem," and that too is not the truth as if it was everyone would be getting high voltages to their exciter arrays.

This was said by you to belittle my work and you do so for your own personal reason of which to me seem like you are doing so just to save face. I have to call people like you out as they have no idea of the damages that they are doing to the movement. Basically you are saying high voltage isn't the answer which goes against what Meyer himself told everyone in his many lecture videos and it also goes against what my experiments have been telling me thought my observations of said technology.

I am sorry I have to do this but it is time for this type of behavior to be put in check as it is hurting the movement. If you build what I have just shown you you will get high voltages to your exciter array, but in order to be able to see what is taking place you must get a differential probe capable of handling the voltages we are dealing with. There is no going around this as you also stated for you simply will not be able to see what 's taking place at the exciter array without the proper equipment to be able to do so, thus making what you have told all of us here and to those that visit this site an untrue statement. Like I said I am sorry for this but it's time for this Tom Foolery to stop as people deserve to be told the truth.
end quote

Ok Edd if with all your vic together you won't get high voltage. i'm sorry for you... its not my problem.. its your fault, not mine...

i don't come here to say thing on your post only... if you look i reached this voltages many times in the past and not only me... and yes i can measure it ..accurately..

If you improve your hearing or reading you would understand how i do it. what i use for that... i don't need any fancy device to see what is going on, although i didn't finished the graduation yet i'm a damn scientist and i know now what i'm doing... more everyday..

and by the way the high voltage probe i get is very good precision... so as my dmm so please forget about me and my equipment and keep going... your not reaching.. i'm not in your way... not holding you down... nor anyone.. nor i want any problematic followers ...

if you know what you are doing even coil connected to a multimeter is good way to see the fields present...

you have no clue about what is the blocking diode... or how it operates... you just keep the same arguments and raise up the voice...

you are a classic moron still accusing me of not following meyer...since 2007(hurting the movement) of course my i'm using science!

sorry to be hard but you don't seem to get it when i put in a good way...

the main problem is that i think you are so so steamy about me having so much higher voltage than you to the cell and yet not being satisfied i come to you and say i have a theory i'm working on..

so stop crying like a baby and create your theory and go put you theory in action and stop wasting our times with your words...

sebosfato

#44 · 9 Aug 2015

i tried up to 99,995% pulse... what i got is frequency doubling... and many other bizarre effects as one might expect..

that is not the point however...

the point really is... are you satisfied with your waveform?

what about the diode? where is your explanation? is it satisfactory? do you think your coils are connected right? did you tried all 64 combinations? would you? why?

for example... are you really sure your diode is opening the circuit as meyer say in new zealand?

i'm sure you can check it... with your equipment.. i can do with mine!

man we are not in competition

i'm just inviting you to take a further look into real science what meyer meant with what he said and show....not just what he said and showed... he was indeed very generous and left over some highly encrypted knowledge that he clearly stated would be understood by those with knowledge of the art.

i went to university of physics for 4 years.. to get closer... not only stay reading and re-reading wiki

i went and took a look at all patents that meyer cited, the documents he cited, the patents that cited him... and so on..

i have nothing else to show that you cannot see here in the forum.. but i won't digest it for anyone like you do... i'm not selling anything...specially not my soul... i just here for help where i can, and search for help and feedback when i think someone can understand me and maybe work with me. I believe in this community work, this space we all must thanks to Steve has being a ring for many battles but in the end brothers and sisters must shake the hands and politely behave.

My wave form is a sine wave since i can only see one side of the cell .. ever increasing until gate... or stable if not gating..

up to 50KV and beyond... with just few bubbles that some times appears.. this with the stan circuit .. one vic split into two sections..

lower primary turns... only 50 to 100 turns...

attachment_14335 attachment_14337 IMG-20150602-00235.jpg IMG-20150602-00238.jpg

outlawstc

#45 · date not recorded

Quote

This is two people comparing and sharing notes effectively as we both can see what is taking place at the cell. I can't do this with you as you don't have the proper equipment to be able to share any information with me. Are you getting what I am telling you now? If not others that are reading this sure are.

Now thats funny Ed.. i remember when these scope shots your sharing first got shared like 2 years ago after your trip to tesla tech.. The scope shot that is not yours that you mention as someone else is one of Max Millers scope shots.. And at the time there was a big debate about how your method was nothing like max setup.. There was no mutual agreements on configuration nor the process between you 2 guys.. That's why this is funny.. you trying to use another researchers scope shot as a second form of conformation to you works.. and your lying about it lol "comparing and sharing effective" i just laughed so hard i think i pissed my self.. people would believe your claims of doing what stan did if you could show extraordinary production of HHO.. All I have ever seen from you is false claims of success.

sebosfato

#46 · date not recorded

Quote from: TGS on August 09, 2015, 13:31:23 pm

probably you add a bad link to your post thats why your post went wrong,.... when posting links i always select all the text and copy in the case the problem is the link .... in that case change the link giving a space on somewhere

TGS

#47 · date not recorded

Can you all read them as it shows up to me as just an Array.

Anyway, both Max and I have the system hooked up exactly the same and our wave forms are thus exactly the same despite outlawstc's inability to read the scope correctly. Think if it this way, if we both have everything hooked up the exact same way how could we have two different wave forms? Our wave forms are the same as the only difference is the load being placed on the VIC transformer. Plus outlawstc didn't bother to watch the video interview of my partner and I as that event is the "Global Breakthrough Energy Movement" that was held in Boulder, Colorado back in 2013 not the tesla tech. At that time Max and I were friends as I even offered to pay for the event for him and others offered him free room and board and were going to pick him up which is free travel but for some reason he didn't want to go.

This is the type of people I have had to deal with for a very long time concerning this technology people that can't reason to well and make things up as they go along. So again, how can we have two different wave forms if we have the entire setup hooked up exactly the same and are taking our measurements at the exact same spot? The only difference is the load that was being placed on the VIC transformer as I had mines hooked up to ten resonant cavities hooked up in series and he had his hooked up to two resonant cavities hooked up in series and the resonant cavities are the load being placed on the VIC transformer. After all this time you can't see that, really? We both have our setups hooked up exactly like this:
(http://i1025.photobucket.com/albums/y320/h2opower/4-23-20119_45_49AM_zpsa492807e.jpg)

So tell me again how can we have two different wave forms? This folks is part of the problem plaguing this technology as some of the people wanting to solve this technology just aren't up to the task at hand. From reading your post you have no idea how to answer that question as you just failed to do so right here in front of everyone for the record. I'd be willing to bet your not laughing now, huh? And for the record outside of myself Max is one of the people I am pinning my hopes on as well as Ronnie Walker and his crew in case something happens to me. I've given up on Russ as his heart just doesn't seem to be in it. Moving on now as I have had enough of this Tom Foolery.

This technology at it's surface seems simple but as you dig into it you find out quickly that you have to take Meyer's words and translate them into a scientific meaning. I don't believe this was done out of stupidity on Meyer's part but as a way to hide the technology in plain sight as after all he was also a business man and who wants everybody stealing your ideas. So, with that in mind I set out to get at the core science that drives this technology and I found it after several years of research. Water molecules can be broken down by taking the electrons away from the atoms that make it up, that is the core science behind this technology and Meyer used a strong ionization field to do so. This is also how plants break the bonds of the water molecules as they take away it's electrons. Now the method that these two different technologies use to accomplish this is different but the core science remains the same. So, any method that can get the electrons away from the atoms that make up the water molecules will work towards breaking the bonds of the water molecules. Meyer chose a method that didn't require much energy input which was creating a high voltage potential energy differential field as shown here:

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

But again may I remind all of you this isn't what the actual wave form looks like as this shows an impossible situation but legally it can be used as it is just a block diagram. This wave form is from outlawstc which shows how the wave form actually looks like as again the drawing figure 10-5 shows an impossible situation:

(http://i1025.photobucket.com/albums/y320/h2opower/2015-08-09_112058_zpsvyspwktk.png)

But the drawing shows Meyer placed a ionizing field on the water molecules which causes the atoms that make up the water molecules to start ejecting their electrons and again the core science remains the same. To get the highest level of amp restriction the B+ must be equal but of opposite voltage to the B- voltage. This is not an easy task to do but I have managed to get mines to within 100 volts of each other and sometimes only 20 volts but that doesn't get used as it falls in the error of the reading devices I use. The lowest current flow through the exciter array was measured at only 0.7 mA at 9kv potential difference measured across the exciter array.

Steve

#48 · date not recorded

just for yr info, this forum technology sometimes have trouble with posting URLs.
Thats why somethime you get empty posts.
I tried to fix this, but i could not find the reason....
Sorry for this.

TGS

#49 · date not recorded

Thanks Steve but I can't post replies as I'd like too as a result.

electrotek

#50 · date not recorded

'The lowest current flow through the exciter array was measured at only 0.7 mA at 9kv potential difference measured across the exciter array."

That's 6.3 A/V, or 5.12 A/1.23V

How does your gas production compare with normal electrolysis, at the same amps?

Asked without disrespect.