Skip to content
Stan’s Legacy

This Patent

Started by unknown · · 12 posts · last reply 3 May 2009

  1. Donaldwfc

    #1 · date not recorded

    what do you guys think

    it's not Stan,s, but it has a lot of the same stuff going on

    also explains why you cant just coat your tubes with a thin layer of insulation as you try to split water with high voltage

    and assuming you can get some proper ceramic it would probably be a lot simpler than Stan's, however i don't know how efficient or productive it is.

     US4427512A1.pdf

  2. Dankie

    #2 · date not recorded

    I'm more interrested in this whole maxwell scalar theory stuff .

    Ask electrojolt is this is efficient .

  3. electrojolt

    #3 · date not recorded

    This is what I did when I tested using 2 TV flyback transformers. It didn't make one single hho bouble.

  4. Steve

    #4 · date not recorded

    This is what I did when I tested using 2 TV flyback transformers. It didn't make one single hho bouble.

    Jolt,

    What did you use as container?

    br
    Steve

  5. Donaldwfc

    #5 · date not recorded

    This is what I did when I tested using 2 TV flyback transformers. It didn't make one single hho bouble.

    It says you need a material with a dielectric MUCH greater than water, 75 is a pretty high dielectric, but it says they had one around 3500, did you use some ceramic material?

    The ratio of dielectrics, 75:3500, is the important factor in putting all the stress on the water.

  6. electrojolt

    #6 · date not recorded

    This is what I did when I tested using 2 TV flyback transformers. It didn't make one single hho bouble.

    Jolt,

    What did you use as container?

    br
    Steve

    I used plastic and water to make the high dielectric container

    P = Plastic
    W = Water as dielectric
    Z = Water to break
    M = Metal


    MPWPZPWPM

    applied 50KV to both Ms

  7. Donaldwfc

    #7 ·

    yea, according to this patent you definitely did not have the right ratio of dielectrics to get the stress focused on the water. consider the ceramic with the dielectric value of 3500 as the "resonant charging chokes" used to restrict amps and let voltage do the work. plastic might have a dielectric value of 2 to 10

  8. Alan

    #8 ·

    patent: ionization collision
    meyer techbrief:
     Applied together, electrical forces (TT') and (UU'), now, causes these moving electrically charged particles to
    superimpose a physical impact unto electrical polarization process (160), as shown in (170) of Figure (3-
    25) ... thereby, increasing gas-yield (88) still further.

    same principle?

  9. Dankie

    #9 · date not recorded

    yea, according to this patent you definitely did not have the right ratio of dielectrics to get the stress focused on the water. consider the ceramic with the dielectric value of 3500 as the "resonant charging chokes" used to restrict amps and let voltage do the work. plastic might have a dielectric value of 2 to 10
    \


    Donald , you do the material research and come back to us with something physical that we can buy for reasonable price and we will try . Ask these guys how much it will take to coat a tube with this ok ...

    This ceramic you speak of , find it , for cheap . And tell us how to install it without some complicated process .

    I have never heard stan mention any particular coating besides , and Dynodon has told me that the tubes were bare .

  10. Donaldwfc

    #10 · date not recorded

    it's not stans patent, and don't tell me what to do

  11. Dankie

    #11 · date not recorded

    it's not stans patent, and don't tell me what to do

    Thats right , you just saved yourself alot of trouble ...

  12. Donaldwfc

    #12 ·

    yes, and for reasons not worth explaining to you

Sign in to reply, or ask for an account.