Stanley Meyer > Stan Meyers system 1

the dielectric property of water

<< < (2/6) > >>

i see it as there is a point of chain reaction like lightning in a cloud.. sure a constant 12 volt source can cross water making one assume that 38 volts is not true as a dielectyric barrier for water.. but that electric field is of low voltage range and will try to covey a distributed capacitance within the whole tube.. i think when potential is delivered in this fashion theres amps because the parallel surface have a lower break down rate... when voltage is applied in a 50 percent duty aka frequency.. you are sending wave sets to the tube and it is not a constan potental being distributed.. this process is based offl based of a high ring type circuit sending a wave format into the capactor rather then pure dc.. that is not a wave guide.. in order for a wave to be seen by water of amplitude yoiu have to be able to send bursts of potential becausde that makes the traveling wave up the tube present to tg water as a electric field..  stans tube has wave sets of 38 volts total for a 1 mm gap to  start the reaction of resonance..  imagine a circuit that hits 38 volts  on 1mm gap tubes in ms range and is on 50 percent wave cycle

alowing for return to 0 ground state before it releses the catlized event that could occur which would be the breackover voltage where you hydrogen ions falls back toward the oxygen as if the neg oxy was  the earth ground and the separated h is the cloud that needs to release energy.. that event would be the break over of the potentials of the 38 volts and it turns in to a dampening effect causing amps to be created in the process as well as heat..

an i dont mean that in all cases its 38volts.. just for a 1mm gap so as gap increases and decreases that will change for example 2mm gap is 76v  3 is 114..  this concours with stans ideas of water being resistive as gap increases. and decreases..

 since it is 38 volts for 1mm you are trying to tune into just right under that barly avoiding the cataclysmic event of break over

ok so this is what i see now.. his patent for the process for producing fuel gas.. the one which shows the electron extraction circuit hooked to the circuit is where the copied writing came from..

notice how it says incremental levels of electrical and wave energy required to produce resonance in each set up.. what is everyones take on this? frequency or amplitude or both being variables of adjustment for tuning in... im gonna be reading more on stans eqautions today and see if i catch any perspective i have missed

Well, in Stans patent, which Donald placed here, today, he doesnt talk about the EEC.
Just simple using voltage pulses from 650V till 2000V on a 3 inch tubeset.
The idea of getting HV pulses across a tube in water can only be done if you use very very tiny small pulses. You must stop pulsing as soon as current starts running.
Amps follow volts in a conductor with a 90 degree delay.
So, just use a duty that is around 25%?

Well, if it was all that simple. ;)


EEC was not part of that patent because it's in the other patents.

Using 38.2 volts on a 1mm gap? Why did Stan talk about Amplitude.
"Higher Amplitude (voltage) has no effect on the resonance action, only faster water splitting?"

When natural water (contaminations) is used at a x temperature it has a dielectric value (can be calculated). So using this water as a dielectric between tubes it has effect on WFC capacitance.



[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version