Ionizationx: a clean environment is a human right!

Projects by members => Projects by members => Sebosfato => Topic started by: sebosfato on May 29, 2013, 05:41:26 am

Title: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on May 29, 2013, 05:41:26 am
well although so much misinformation around what meyer really did i think a good starting point is to understand why he said the things he said and how to find the info he had to work with...

i came up with a theory that says that is indeed possible to generate hydrogen and oxygen from water while still generating tremendous amount of electrical energy if required..

to achieve that is necessary to understand what is the electric field between ions in water solution.

The reason is simple:

Is impossible to have acceleration if the forces are in balance... so a greater electric field must be applied otherwise nothing happens...  (no observable results appear.

Title: Tay Hee Han
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 01, 2013, 14:31:17 pm
Tay Hee Han Patent may be the solution to our prayers...

The he clearly talks about disrupting the forces of water covalent bounding by applying high electric fields but restricting amps using a ceramic material that has high dielectric constant!

As a dielectric is a insulator to the flow of amps but a high dielectric conducts well electric fields! Remembering the current thru a resistor is proportional to the electric field in that resistor and it dissipates power, thereto there is a raise in heat generated to some degree to be expected. This is power loss in the circuit. The ceramics get hot and must handle it.

Now coming from that point of view of how to inhibit the amp flow, there must be a way of using a circuit to create this effect?
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 01, 2013, 14:54:06 pm
which leads me to a question ???

Meyer used a complex of composes to restrict the amps as he described in one of his patents as a sandwich of resistive elements...

what if it was his turn around the need for dielectrics?
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 01, 2013, 17:33:07 pm
which leads me to a question ???

Meyer used a complex of composes to restrict the amps as he described in one of his patents as a sandwich of resistive elements...

what if it was his turn around the need for dielectrics?

Yes. Good questions here.
Its in his patents, but not found anywhere in his legacy.
Don didnt find anything like that.
But maybe it was just a clear coating?



 
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 02, 2013, 18:34:42 pm
we know he indeed used lot of plastics and talks about insulated cavity all the time...

The tay hee patent is very interesting because it was cited by meyer in some of his patents... so he clearly indicated that this is the prior art to the things he did... why would he show something like that?

why?

He was very smart in my opinion...

Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 04, 2013, 14:13:33 pm
My quick 2 cents worth here - I looked at the Han patent, amongst others, a few years ago (waterfuelcell org AU) but it took a while to connect the dots...

Stainless Steel forms a very very thin Chromium Oxide dielectric layer (thats what makes it stainless) - the thinner the better, refer to semiconductor physics for more information. ALSO, Dr Pollack, University of Washington, has an excellent 1 hour presentation that is well worth the time spent viewing it several times. AND, high voltage "arc over" has a "hold-off time," it doesn't happen instantaneously. BUT, getting it all just right is a bit of a task to say the least. HOWEVER, nearly anyone can make anything work at least once; the trick is to make it happen reliably every time over the spectrum of environmental and other changes.

THEREFORE, Mr. Meyer may have progressed to his "water spark plug injector" to ease the tuning and eliminate some of the variables.

Have a good one!
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 04, 2013, 15:12:52 pm
Id like to share my thoughts what if you form a capacitor using water and a higher constant dielectric at the center for more dense electric field lines if u want and connect this water capacitor to a "cold energy" circuit that means no sparks inside water area instead build a tube with nitrogen gas seperate and connect the capacitor in this circuit with the tube ... if excess energy coming from spark discharge is stored inside the circuit then it will eventually destroy the circuit or destroy the material of the circuit with the lower dielectric strength and that should be water.  also water absorbs very high frequencies from what I know.. it won't work with materials that dont absorb very high frequencies.. the only tricky part is getting the circuit right
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 05, 2013, 07:43:17 am
Good questions!

Well my first guess is that if the dielectric is at the middle than the waters has no connection to each other than the dielectric,,,
The problem could be the contact of the electrode to the water which mean that it can exchange charge with the water.. interesting,,,
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 06, 2013, 03:40:36 am
well that thing about having the electrodes in contact with water would transfer the charge to the water and that would thereto generate ionized gases probably... but would consume greater amps at high voltage than would the other idea for example since a dielectric inside water should not cause the double layer effect...


I think that having the dielectric in the middle would suffer al the stress if we are giving the charge to the water itself...  What is nice is that the ions give would have the same polarity as the voltage applied...

The main problem with electrolysis is that when hydrogen and oxygen build up in the cells electrodes they set up an electrochemical potential and this must be hardly fight with a such over voltage to be able to discharge the ions in water... so its waste of energy all the way.  Every volt means 1 coulomb will do 1 joule of work...

the main problem is that the electrolysis cell is indeed a fuel cell as well since it has the metallic conductor in contact with the electrolyte the triple phase is formed so when there is hydrogen in one electrode and at the other the thing simply develops this potential and it tells you that if you don't apply at least 1,24v electrolysis is not going to happen... actually as said there is the need for at least also a over voltage. 

this is the prior art

Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 11, 2013, 09:33:47 am
Electric forces are really enormous in the original idea... the mechanical stress must be considered for instance...


I found that the forces between two charged plates is F=QE/2







Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 11, 2013, 11:57:24 am
 E=σ/ε0 for the region between the plates..

Φ=2ΕΑ=q/ε0 <=> E=σΑ/2Aε0 <=> E=σ/2ε0 for one charged infinite plate





Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 11, 2013, 15:30:20 pm
 8)
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 16, 2013, 14:21:52 pm
I got some good news ... at the university i got access to all equipment to make ceramics materials... and the teacher will help me in the process... isn't it great?


-
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 25, 2013, 17:12:54 pm
I found that the electric field between ions in water depends only on its concentration. If the water is very pure, the ions are far away from each other and thus the force of attraction between them is weak.


Meyer stated that the purest water should have the greatest amount of energy releasable.


I calculated for a pair of opposite ions of charge + and - ,  1,6E-19C  @ distance r = 1nm the electric field is equal to 35,5Kv/mm


If the distance increase by a factor of 10 the electric field decrease by a 100 factor. (square relationship)


So at 10nm the electric field is 355V/mm  and so on...




Dipoles in Polarizable Media Reduce The Strength of the Coulomb InteractionWe learned in electrostatics that charges embedded in a dielectric material interact by a Coulomb interaction which is reduced in strength by a dimensionless factor called the dielectric constant e:
U(r) =k q1 q2/er



This reduction in strength of the Coulomb interaction is due to the polarization of the particles of the dielectric medium - either induced or permanent dipoles around a free charge will be oriented so as to terminate some of the field lines coming from the free charge.Note that the Coulomb interaction continues to have its long-ranged character, just with a reduced strength. This is sometimes referred to as dielectric screening of the charge.
For pure water at room pressure and 25 C, e = 78.5, i.e. Coulomb interactions are reduced in strength by a factor of about 80 relative to the vacuum. This is because of the permanent dipole moment carried by every water molecule. Note that the electrons tend to stay close to the oxygen, leaving two positively charged protons on one side of an H2O.
Sometimes people refer to this reduction of the strength of the Coulomb interaction as `screening' of the charge.







Example: Estimate the range at which two electron charges have an interaction energy � kB T, in pure water at standard lab pressure and temperature.kB T = k q1 q2 / (er) or r = k e2 / (ekB T)
Plug in k = 9×109 N·m2/C2, e = 1.6×10-19 C, e = 80, and kB T = 4×10-21 J, to find r = 7×10-10 m = 7 Å
This distance is often called the Bjerrum length
B =k e2/ekB T=     7    Å =     0.7     nm

Concentration and MolarityWe will soon be talking about concentrations a lot, and we will refer to concentrations in two different ways.
Number density - we'll use the symbol r to refer to number of molecules per volume, either in m-3 or in cm-3.
Molarity - to read the biochemical literature you need to understand molar concentrations. The molarity of X is often expressed as [X], and is simply the number of moles per litre.
A mole is Avogadro's number (NA = 6.02×1023) molecules.
You should remember that a liter is the volume of a cube which is 10 cm on a side, and therefore that 1 liter = 1000 cm3 = 10-3 m3.
You may also recall that a litre of water at room temperature/pressure has a mass of 1 kg.
Finally you should remember that the chemical weights given for elements in the periodic table, and on the sides of jars of chemicals, are the molar masses in g, i.e. the masses of NA = 6.02×1023 molecules. Thus the mass of a mole of hydrogen atoms is close to 1 g; the mass of a mole of O2 molecules is about 32 g (2 times 16 g).

Example: Find the molarity of water, for pure water.We first note that a mole of water molecules has a mass of about 18 g.
So, [H2O] = number of moles in a litre of water = (1000 g) / (18 g) = 55.
We say that pure water is at 55 M concentration, in pure water.
Example: Find the number density, and estimate the mean distance between molecules, which are at 1 M concentration.1 M means 6.02×1023 molecules/liter, or a number density of r = 6.02×1023 / (103     cm3) = 6 ×1020/cm3.
The average distance between molecules is just the 1/3 power of the volume per molecule, or
distance = [1/(6.02×1020     cm-3]1/3 = 1.2 ×10-7 cm
or about 1.2 nm or 12 Å.
Once you know this, you can quickly estimate the distance between molecules in solution at some other concentration (note the 1/3 power!)

at 10-3 M, the mean distance between solute molecules is 12 nm;   

at 10-6 M (micromolar) the mean distance between solute molecules is 120 nm;

and at 10-9 M (nanomolar or nM) the mean distance between solute molecules is 1.2 microns.


Example: How many g of NaCl should be added to 1 l of pure H2O to prepare a 100 mM concentration of Na+?
Easy - we need to put 0.1 moles of NaCl into a litre of water. Molar mass of NaCl = 23 + 35.5 g = 58.5, so we should add 5.85 g of NaCl to 1 l of water.
Sounds easy, but people in labs screw this kind of thing up all the time!

Free Ions Strongly Screen Coulomb InteractionsAll aqueous solutions - even pure water - contain ions. Those ions can terminate electric field lines, and therefore can severely screen Coulomb interactions of charges. Important examples of ions relevant to biology:
Univalent ions - the cations Na+ and K+ are present at roughly 0.1 M concentrations, outside and inside cells, respectively. There are negative ions (`anions' or `counterions') at the same concentration to balance the charge; in the biochem lab this is often Cl-, and in the cell most of these `counterions' are glutamate ions.
Divalent ions - charge-2 cations like Mg2+ and Ca2+ are present at roughly mM concentrations in cells, and in many biochemistry expeiments.
Charged molecules - many proteins, nucleic acids, and other organic molecules in cells are charged, i.e. they give up ions to solution when they are put in water. A good example is DNA, which has one phosphate ion (PO4-) on each nucleotide. The counterion is usually Na+.
Water itself - pure H2O has pH 7.0, which means that the concentrations of hydronium (protons) and hydroxyl ions are [H+] = [OH-] = 10-7 M. So - even pure water is not the simple dielectric of elementary electrostatics (in general, nothing about water is simple).
Free ions do more than reduce the overall amplitude of Coulomb interactions - they change the shape of the potential energy, making it go to zero exponentially (rapidly) beyond a characteristic distance called theDebye screening length.
Roughly speaking, in solution with ions present, the 1/r Coulomb interaction is modified to have thescreened Coulomb form:
U(r) =k q1 q2/er      short     distances
kq1 q2/er
e-r/lD
    long     distancesHere, small and big r are roughly the cases where there are, respectively, no charges, and many charges between q1 and q2. When there are no ions between q1 and q2, the interaction is the usual 1/r potential. But when you separate the two charges to a sufficient distance that in a volume of diameter r you have many ions, those ions will organize so as to terminate the field lines of q1 and q2, thus eliminating their long-ranged interaction.
Unfortunately the theory behind this is a bit hard - in most cases of interest, the effective coupling k� is exceedingly difficult to calculate. And the general form of the interaction in the middle-range where there are only a few ions in the volume between q1 and q2 is in general not too well understood, especially in cases where divalent, or worse, multivalent ions are present.
But - the main point is that as long as there are many ions between two charges, their interaction is screenedstrongly, simply because the ions can terminate electric field lines. A free ion attracts ions from solution of opposite sign, making a little `counterion cloud' which neutralizes its charge, and therefore by Gauss's law, basically eliminates the electric field.
The size of this `cloud' is roughly the screening length lD, the parameter that determines when the exponential `cuts off' the Coulomb interaction in U(r). A useful formula for lD is due to Debye, which comes from a certain relatively-easy-to-solve limiting case of interaction of charges with free ions present:
lD =ekB T
4pk e2/i

ri zi2


1/2

where the sum over i is over all the types (species) of ions, and where ri and zi are the number densities and valencies of the various types of ions. As you can see, as you add more and more ions, because the valences enter squared, the screening length goes down, down, down.This formula is often called the Debye screening length, and provides a good first estimate of the distance beyond which Coulomb interactions can be essentially ignored, as well as the size of the region near a point charge where opposite-charge counterions can be found.For aqueous (water) solution at room temperature, it is handy to rewrite the Debye screening length in terms of the Bjerrum length,
lD =[/t][/t][/t][/t][/t][/t]
1
[/t][/t][/t]

4plB�
i
zi2 ri

1/2
 
where you recall that lB = 0.7 nm.
Example: What is the Debye screening length in 1M NaCl aqueous solution?Well, above we figured out that r = 6.02 ×1020     cm3 for 1 M concentration, so both Na+ and Cl- are present at this number density. Their valences are z = +1 and -1 respectively, giving us
lD = 1 / [4p×0.7×10-7     cm ×(6.02 ×1020 + 6.02 ×1020) cm-3]1/2

= 0.3 ×10-7 cm
or lD = 0.3 nm for a 1 M 1:1 electrolyte (in this case, Na+:Cl-).
The point is that for 1 M 1:1 ionic solution you have a screening length of less than 1 nm, meaning that at even a couple of nanometers separation, two charges no longer appreciably interact by the Coulomb interaction.

This example leads to three handy formulae for the Debye screening length for common ionic conditions at room temperature:lD = [0.30     nm/[NaCl] ] for 1:1 electrolytes (e.g. Na+:Cl-)
lD = [0.18     nm/([MgCl2] )] for 2:1 electrolytes (e.g. Mg2+:2Cl-)
lD = [0.15     nm/([MgSO4] )] for 2:2 electrolytes (e.g. Mg2+:SO42-)
These formulae is stolen from Israelachvili's book (see references below) and are incredibly useful.

Inside cells where there is always > 150 mM of univalent salt around, this means that Coulomb interactions have a range of about 1 nm (=0.3/�[0.15] nm)Note that even pure deionized distilled water has a not-too-long screening length, since there is 107 M concentration of H+ and OH- ions excited thermally (we say that the pH of pure distilled deionized water is 7). The screening length in this case - the maximum possible in water - is 0.3/ [(10-7)] nm  1000 nm = 1 micron. So for separations beyond a few microns, even in absolutely pure water, two ions no longer `see' one another via the Coulomb interaction.

Charged surfaces trap counterionsThe surfaces of large proteins, nucleic acids, cell membranes, and many other surfaces relevant to biology, are often charged. The charges are often important for solubulizing the proteins or membranes (as we have already mentioned for DNA). In any case, those charged surfaces, when immersed in solution where ions are present, will attract a thin `atmosphere' of opposite-charge counterions.
Of course, the thickness of this charge layer is about lD thick. The resulting sandwich of opposite-sign charges is often called an electric double layer.
As you might guess, an implication of this is that charged surfaces, and therefore biomolecules, only interact by Coulomb interactions when they are less than a few lD from one another. Under than a few nm from one another to `feel' one another, and to interact.
This leads to perhaps the only thing that is a simplification of molecular biology relative to chemical engineering - in general we can think of the Coulomb interaction as being a short-ranged interaction, or even a `contact' interaction.

Further readingA superb introduction to interactions between molecules, and with some attention paid to colloids and biology is Intermolecular and Surface Forces with Applications to Colloidal and Biological Systems, J.N. Israelachvili, Academic Press 1985 (there is probably a newer edition, but the original version is one of my favorite books).
Title: Re: Electric field
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 26, 2013, 08:44:18 am
This means the Tay Hee patent is indeed correct assuming those electric fields are capable of physically change the proprieties of water.


at 0,84nm the E-Field is 50Kv/mm so...


Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 01, 2013, 17:28:50 pm
This is the correct formulas for water (more aproximate from real)
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 06, 2013, 18:49:16 pm
Today i made a thought about how important is to know the things like the electric field outside a capacitor is zero.

I'm attempting to find a geometry in which current can be generated from a water cell using high voltage electric fields, dielectrics layers and probably movement too.

I think i found a way to actually force the ions from two different water containers to combine and than reverse the field to accelerate the other ions to combine again thereto generating alternating current.  I think this is what stan called the resonant action... when the ions collide they must generate at least more ion pairs ...

The movement is only needed to try to figure somehow it could work without reversing the field ... but i found that reversing the field is not energy consuming as i though it could be, since if the capacitors simply discharge thru a coil than it will reverse its voltage almost fully already..

The idea came from some comments in a recent patent, where they states that they make an electric shunt between two electric field sources and this shunt allows the current to flow because there is a ground plane shielding the electric field.

Ok

But what i found that should impossible because the electric field will always try to go in the easier path../

But making some drawings i found that if i get a pair of electric field sources and just take a deionization surface on one side of each than connect the deionization surfaces to one another than what i find is that it forms a kind of faraday cage thereto there must be an equipotential surface. If however the dielectric is polarized than the charges adsorbed will run in a circuit at a given voltage derived from the dielectric static polarization.

...
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 08, 2013, 10:45:50 am
why did meyer write the formulas like this???? nobody would make this mistake by accident... and why is everyone focusing on water?? is it magic? if you find an energy generating phenomena then why make hydrogen when you can use it to power a home/??

how many ions will you have inside water ,if u know the total charge they have and avg. speed then you can calculate emf but how will it break conservation of energy?   

the thing is that many people say the same ,that lorentz law only applies for closed currents and maxwell's displacement current http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Displacement_current is flawed as it is not a real current, lets say in a capacitor but a pseudocurrent while some circuits are open momentarily this law doesnt apply but I havent confirmed this yet I will have to make some experiments but I haven't got much equipment if anyone cares to make them pm me.

in this schematic I've marked how the forces should be according to lorentz law but the man who made this experiment says that the antenna doesnt rotate..
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 08, 2013, 11:08:33 am
well is impossible to know why he did such mistake.... anyway is indeed clear why he show this formula!

Conservation of energy is the least of the problems.

As paul brown stated when ions are inserted in electric fields the result is electric current the energy actually comes not from the field itself but from the event that generated the ion be it chemical, nuclear or cosmic source.

in water they are in solution and water is a dielectric so they are loosely attracted to one another such that they can actually be separated if a  strong electric field is applied. (according to the equation  meyer indicated)

Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 08, 2013, 11:21:56 am
Geon

From what i learned or what i think i remember i learned in physics displacement current is equivalent to the magnetic field inside a capacitor (thing that shouldn't exist since there is no current flowing in there) so the concept of current flowing thru the vacuum was developed.

In a normal capacitor theres only displacement current during charging and discharging since there is electric fields changing an polarization state is changing.

In water capacitor assuming you restrict the amps polarization never stops happening so there is a constant displacement current, which is function of the applied electric field and physical and  chemical proprieties of the studied water.

Lets guess that why meyer called it the electrical polarization generator.
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 08, 2013, 13:06:31 pm
perhaps does anybody have a function generator to make the Z experiment?
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 08, 2013, 17:57:03 pm
Theres no magic in water its just a dielectric medium that has specific proprieties.

According to what meyer said is possible to use water as electron source somehow generating at the same time hydrogen and oxygen using voltage as a force field.

According to paul brown ions in an electric field forms current. And the power is not provenient from the electric field itself but from the ionizing event.

According to me, ions in water has a certain distance somewhat around 1nm between each other at a given concentration. The force of attraction between them is weak in comparison with molecular bond forces since water is a dielectric medium and acts to reduce the electric field of the ions. Is possible thereto to use external electric field to split or sort the ions apart.

Once the ions are separated:

The ions can be discharged into a metallic surface becoming thereto electrically stable and coming out of the water as hydrogen and oxygen. In this case the discharge of the ions mean generating more electricity already.
As the method of generation is not electrochemical but eletcro-physical the voltage should not limited to 1,24v but instead determined by the number of ions reaching the electrode and the electric fields present to cause the separation aNd the capacitance between the two deionization surfaces.

The idea is two pairs of isolated Electric field sources connected in series but having a dielectric between them and a faraday cage forming two deionization surfaces. As the faraday cage has a dielectric inside and the other field source outside, the charges are localized.

In this system i guess is possible to find a way to discharge ions of both polarities at the same time but the most simple is to discharge only one polarity at time...  and accelerate the undischarged ions to collide...

 or:

The ions can be accelerated to collide with water molecules





 
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 08, 2013, 18:33:57 pm
you need very high ion speeds to break apart water otherwise you only get some heat.. a proffesor told that repulsion of similar charges moving in a line changes to attraction above a certain speed in open circuits so by contrast if the charges moving in a line have speed greater than this and then hit a barrier and stop suddendly conservation of momentum says there will be an explosion ...
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 08, 2013, 20:40:56 pm
The acceleration is a=E*q/mass

thereto E must be E=a*mass/q

The required acceleration i don't know how to calculate but we can try to figure it out.

I think the density of water would be needed too

The mean free path should be the distance that the ion can travel without colliding with neighbors molecules...   

Having the force divided by the mass is the acceleration. acceleration * time squared/2 = distance    and a*t= v so the velocity squared times mass/2 = energy    than it need to be converted to ev ...

than i think that the reverse direction of this calculations could let to the acceleration needed and so the electric field needed.

I'm not sure because i didn't learned this so well..

but one electron volt is the energy an electron that has a mass of

http://www.ou.edu/research/electron/bmz5364/calc-kv.html
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 09, 2013, 00:40:07 am
At least from what the equations describes which is equivelant to the lorentz force law but for open circuits it has this special case where what I said above happens. In vacuum  the speed limit is v= ((sqrt2)/2)*c 70% the speed of light but when there is a medium this limit is lowered say for plasma or a capacitor which is equivelant to an open circuit. Anything inside a circuit that has different dielectric strength exhibits this because the relative velocities are different for the two parts but the current has to be interrupted for this to happen

the mean free path is very short inside liquid water

in vacuum the required voltage is above 130kV to accelerate them fast enough

 F=Eq    ma=Eq    a=Eq/m   or   V=-E*dx     V=-dE/dx

so the electric field needed in vacuum is E=V / x

easy way would be using conservation of energy  Ei=Ki+Ui=Ef=Kf+Uf   V*q=1/2m*v^2

v=sqrt(2Vq/m)    v=sqrt(2Ex/m)

with the required velocity v'=sqrt2/2*c

V=m*v'^2/2q    V=m*(1/2)*c^2/(2q)

Mass of an electron is:
9.11x10^-31 kg

Charge of an electron is:
-1.60x10^-19 C (Coulomb's)

 V=m*(1/2)*c^2/2q        V=9.11x10^-31 * 0.5 * (2.99 x 10^8)^2 / 2*1.60x10^-19=127256V


for argon gass I calculated 113.8kV needed but I'm not sure about the distance between atoms I used a simplistic model in reality this limit should be really lower than 130kV

I used 4.79*10^-8 as distance between argon atoms but this number should be lower when there are charges moving

the formula I derived is pretty simple see attachments
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 10, 2013, 10:07:12 am
maybe in vapor phase the water gets more mean free path... I think that is indeed possible to apply up to 100kv/mm in water according to today advance in materials science.
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 13, 2013, 09:27:22 am
from CRC handbook of chemistry: 2 H2O + 2 e ⇌ H2 + 2 OH–     reduction potential: –0.8277   @ATP @25C
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 13, 2013, 15:26:58 pm
What is this reduction potential?

Could you tell me in which section you found this?
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 14, 2013, 09:09:23 am
Sorry I dont know more about it I hope someone would know lol I'm still learning  use wikipedia  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduction_potential I found it in kinetics and electrochemistry

more useful info
energy content of hydrogen gas(heat of combustion) is 141.8 x 10^3 J/g 
141.8 x 10^3 J/g    * 2g/1mol 
286 kJ/mol 
or 286 x 10^3 J/mol * 1mol/ 6.022 x 10^23 atoms =
4.7492 x 10^-19  Joules per atom

dissociation energy of H2 is 435.7 x 10^3 J/mol  and of cation K+H2 is 6.1 x 10^3 J/mol  and of K+H2O is 74.9  x 10^3 J/mol  , H2O vibrational data is symmetrical stretching 3657/cm, bend 1595/cm ,antisymmetrical stretching  3756/cm
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 14, 2013, 12:56:50 pm
and here is it where you are going wrong, from my point of view.
What isotope of hydrogen are you talking about?
H1? H2?, para, ortho?

Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 14, 2013, 14:24:15 pm
I said H2 I havent found any info for the isotopes if you find them post them here so we can keep all these together.

Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 14, 2013, 16:36:47 pm
Inside a liter of water there are 112 grams of H or 7.9 x 10^6 Joules of H2 I can't find dissociation energy for H2O but I'm sure its greater than that..
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 15, 2013, 12:41:29 pm
Hydrogen Fuel Cell

Hydrogen and oxygen can be combined in a fuel cell to produce electrical energy. A fuel cell uses a chemical reaction to provide an external voltage, as does a battery, but differs from a battery in that the fuel is continually supplied in the form of hydrogen and oxygen gas. It can produce electrical energy at a higher efficiency than just burning the hydrogen to produce heat to drive a generator because it is not subject to the thermal bottleneck from the second law of thermodynamics. It's only product is water, so it is pollution-free. All these features have led to periodic great excitement about its potential, but we are still in the process of developing that potential as a pollution-free, efficient energy source (see Kartha and Grimes).

(http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/imgheat/fuelcell.gif)
Combining a mole of hydrogen gas and a half-mole of oxygen gas from their normal diatomic forms produces a mole of water. A detailed analysis of the process makes use of the thermodynamic potentials. This process is presumed to be at 298K and one atmosphere pressure, and the relevant values are taken from a table of thermodynamic properties.

Quantity   
H2
0.5 O2
H2O
Change
Enthalpy   
0
0
-285.83 kJ
ΔH = -285.83 kJ
Entropy   
130.68 J/K
0.5 x 205.14 J/K
69.91 J/K
TΔS = -48.7 kJ
Energy is provided by the combining of the atoms and from the decrease of the volume of the gases. Both of those are included in the change in enthalpy included in the table above. At temperature 298K and one atmosphere pressure, the system work is

W = PΔV = (101.3 x 103 Pa)(1.5 moles)(-22.4 x 10-3 m3/mol)(298K/273K) = -3715 J
Since the enthalpy H= U+PV, the change in internal energy U is then

ΔU = ΔH - PΔV = -285.83 kJ - 3.72 kJ = -282.1 kJ
The entropy of the gases decreases by 48.7 kJ in the process of combination since the number of water molecules is less than the number of hydrogen and oxygen molecules combining. Since the total entropy will not decrease in the reaction, the excess entropy in the amount TΔS must be expelled to the environment as heat at temperature T. The amount of energy per mole of hydrogen which can be provided as electrical energy is the change in the Gibbs free energy:

ΔG = ΔH - TΔS = -285.83 kJ + 48.7 kJ = -237.1 kJ
For this ideal case, the fuel energy is converted to electrical energy at an efficiency of 237.1/285.8 x100% = 83%! This is far greater than the ideal efficiency of a generating facility which burned the hydrogen and used the heat to power a generator! Although real fuel cells do not approach that ideal efficiency, they are still much more efficient than any electric power plant which burns a fuel.

Comparison of electrolysis and the fuel cell process
In comparing the fuel cell process to its reverse reaction, electrolysis of water, it is useful treat the enthalpy change as the overall energy change. The Gibbs free energy is that which you actually have to supply if you want to drive a reaction, or the amount that you can actually get out if the reaction is working for you. So in the electrolysis/fuel cell pair where the enthalpy change is 285.8 kJ, you have to put in 237 kJ of energy to drive electrolysis and the heat from the environment will contribute TΔS=48.7 kJ to help you. Going the other way in the fuel cell, you can get out the 237 kJ as electric energy, but have to dump TΔS = 48.7 kJ to the environment.
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 15, 2013, 12:46:30 pm
Electrolysis of Water

By providing energy from a battery, water (H2O) can be dissociated into the diatomic molecules of hydrogen (H2) and oxygen (O2). This process is a good example of the the application of the four thermodynamic potentials.

(http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/imgheat/electrol.gif)
The electrolysis of one mole of water produces a mole of hydrogen gas and a half-mole of oxygen gas in their normal diatomic forms. A detailed analysis of the process makes use of the thermodyamic potentials and the first law of thermodynamics. This process is presumed to be at 298K and one atmosphere pressure, and the relevant values are taken from a table of thermodynamic properties.

Quantity   
H2O
H2
0.5 O2
Change
Enthalpy   
-285.83 kJ
0
0
ΔH = 285.83 kJ
Entropy   
69.91 J/K
130.68 J/K
0.5 x 205.14 J/K
TΔS = 48.7 kJ
The process must provide the energy for the dissociation plus the energy to expand the produced gases. Both of those are included in the change in enthalpy included in the table above. At temperature 298K and one atmosphere pressure, the system work is

W = PΔV = (101.3 x 103 Pa)(1.5 moles)(22.4 x 10-3 m3/mol)(298K/273K) = 3715 J
Since the enthalpy H= U+PV, the change in internal energy U is then

ΔU = ΔH - PΔV = 285.83 kJ - 3.72 kJ = 282.1 kJ
This change in internal energy must be accompanied by the expansion of the gases produced, so the change in enthalpy represents the necessary energy to accomplish the electrolysis. However, it is not necessary to put in this whole amount in the form of electrical energy. Since the entropy increases in the process of dissociation, the amount TΔS can be provided from the environment at temperature T. The amount which must be supplied by the battery is actually the change in the Gibbs free energy:

ΔG = ΔH - TΔS = 285.83 kJ - 48.7 kJ = 237.1 kJ
Since the electrolysis process results in an increase in entropy, the environment "helps" the process by contributing the amount TΔS. The utility of the Gibbs free energy is that it tells you what amount of energy in other forms must be supplied to get the process to proceed.

Reverse process: Hydrogen fuel cell
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 16, 2013, 06:07:01 am
I just made a calculation based on this numbers

237,1Kj = 65,89W If you divide this by 2 mols of electrons (+-53,6 Amps)  than you get the voltage 1,23v would be required to give this electrical energy

now

285Kj = 79,16W    divided by 53,6 Amps the voltage is 1,48V 

Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 16, 2013, 14:16:42 pm
has anybody ever used 100kV pulses to dissociate water ??
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 16, 2013, 17:45:12 pm
The only chance i got to place high voltage on water was when i:

Used ultra high purity water   (up to 2kv straight to the water cell)

Used mylar foils rolled around the electrode     (here vapor was generated applying 40kv at certain frequency) the vapor came out from the inter mylar layers)

Used corona dope coating on the electrodes.    No result at all

Used wax   No   results at all

Using deionized water i think i could get up to at least 800V

Using resonance i could make two cells get up to 20 amps thru where there was 600v at the resonant tank at 16khz    the coils was big thick wire, about 1mH

 

Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 16, 2013, 20:34:15 pm
I think with 55kV water vapor will explode according to the "theory" I told you can you verify using the formula I gave 3 pages back because my calculations gave a weird result?  post #24
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 16, 2013, 22:23:24 pm
Geon:

...with regards to voltages across the cell, currently I'm getting higher voltages across the plates by smearing dielectric sparkplug grease on the plates and using RO water with 100,000uf of caps connected in parallel.

believe it or not the grease even with a 1/8 inch layer makes gas at below 100ma...

the stuff is supposed to stop electrical shorts when covering automobile electrical components yet it appears to work somehow on the plates for more gas at higher voltages...

kb
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 18, 2013, 02:24:38 am
what if tay he han was a collaborator of meyer responsible to patent the restriction of the amps only technology? just to fool everyone ?

Look at the year the patents came out!

Or maybe meyer copied tay he han ideas and improved them?

Meyer circuits seems to be exactly the needed equipment for making the thing happens in terms of system operability!
 
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 19, 2013, 23:32:12 pm
has anybody ever used 100kV pulses to dissociate water ??
I had 70KV passing thru the cell....

Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 19, 2013, 23:38:10 pm
well water gas is different from water liquid which one did you have? not one has verified the formula I gave .. ::)
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 19, 2013, 23:41:42 pm
well water gas is different from water liquid which one did you have? not one has verified the formula I gave .. ::)

Thru water, Geon.
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 20, 2013, 00:40:05 am
I made a mistake in the first formula it should be more like this , the results that I wrote are correct.

its late here goodnight
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 20, 2013, 03:58:58 am
has anybody ever used 100kV pulses to dissociate water ??
I had 70KV passing thru the cell....

But across the cell?
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 20, 2013, 09:36:55 am
has anybody ever used 100kV pulses to dissociate water ??
I had 70KV passing thru the cell....

But across the cell?

Well, what is across or thru.
I used a spark gap in serie with the cell.
70kv went thru the cell, thru the sparkgap. Nice big sparking.

steve
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 20, 2013, 18:39:39 pm
I mean, in your case than the electrical stress remained mostly into the spark gap not on water!

I'm not sure if its the correct term but when i mean across i mean you could see or measure the high voltage applied at the cell poles.

I'm pretty inclined to believe that meyer had some secrete inside its inner tube!! Probably also in the construction of the resonant cavity!

The idea is that to apply a high electric potential to the water you need big charge and yet the insulating material should have high resistance, dielectric strength, and dielectric constant, than water for the system proposed.

Meyer indeed told us the secrete is to restrict the amps

He was really smart since he just mentioned it and never provided the background necessary for this subject to be understandable.

Of course it was so simple and stupid that he could not reveal this or his patents would be useless.

Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 25, 2013, 06:24:28 am
Do you agree with me Steve? about how much voltage there was across water plates?

Now i came into a interesting though!

About geometric configuration and the electromagnetic field inside the cell!

Meyer said in the tech brief that he was using not only statical forces but also dynamic forces.... Well when he says dynamic forces in my opinion he meant that not only electrostatic forces are present and as such because a changing electric field must have associated with it a changing magnetic field perpendicular to the flow of current.



Electromagnetic waves travel at speed of light, but how does it apply for a water capacitor?

What about a coil instead of a high dielectric material? to restrict amps but allow voltage to take over?
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 25, 2013, 10:17:22 am
Do you agree with me Steve? about how much voltage there was across water plates?

Now i came into a interesting though!

About geometric configuration and the electromagnetic field inside the cell!

Meyer said in the tech brief that he was using not only statical forces but also dynamic forces.... Well when he says dynamic forces in my opinion he meant that not only electrostatic forces are present and as such because a changing electric field must have associated with it a changing magnetic field perpendicular to the flow of current.



Electromagnetic waves travel at speed of light, but how does it apply for a water capacitor?

What about a coil instead of a high dielectric material? to restrict amps but allow voltage to take over?

Maybe you do not measure 70kv across the cell, but the cell is part of the closed circuit and the hv goes thru the cell.

A coil is doing restriction of course. First voltage goes, before amps flow.
If you cut off power at the moment that the current starts, then you have a possible meyer setup.

Steve
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 27, 2013, 02:19:31 am
This would be somehow equivalent to applying high frequency indeed...

My point is! High voltage actually can do nothing to water in a burst like this having extremely low current! a capacitor is known by its major characteristic it can not change voltage instantly but it can change current instantly. For example you discharge a capacitor thru a resistor... At the instant the capacitor and resistor are in a close circuit the initial current is going to be maximum since voltage is pressure and resistor sets the time needed to the capacitor discharge.

So high voltage don't really goes thru the circuit its indeed across the spark gap and at the cell only few volts if so...

An inductor can change its voltage instantly but it can't change current instantly likewise.

If it was a capacitor discharging and somehow the spark gap is improved by making the contacts actually touch each other at every spark, than things could be different! Since high current can flow to charge up water rapdilly enough! But thats only considering ideal water with ZEro ions in it.

For real water is impossible to apply such high voltage fields without restricting the damn amps like meyer told us about!
Title: Choke amp restriction
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 28, 2013, 02:19:51 am
I meant in the post before the last, that stan may have used just used geometry and coils instead of high dielectric constant dielectric.... does any of you understand the reason i suggested it?
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 28, 2013, 06:20:43 am
what if you make an aqueous non-electrolyte solution (for example w/sugar) maybe it would restrict more amps than DI water
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 28, 2013, 09:21:40 am
Good question geon... what about alcohol?

what is the capacitance of a coil?

The inductor can polarize instantly!
Title: Re: Choke amp restriction
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 28, 2013, 10:06:40 am
I meant in the post before the last, that stan may have used just used geometry and coils instead of high dielectric constant dielectric.... does any of you understand the reason i suggested it?

I am with you on this theory, Fabio.

With the proper balance, we might see voltage with limited amps.

Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 28, 2013, 10:59:40 am
The idea is basically a tubular cell having a coil of very thin wire possibly resistive wire and this wire is connected to the outer tube... but than outside of this modest big coil there is another electrode here the high voltage is applied, the coil restricts the amps but allows the electric field to pass.... 
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 28, 2013, 17:58:08 pm
what i mean is:

the resonant charging chokes are part of and are integrated in the cell assembly geometry!!! Placed just where the high dielectric would be in the tay hee patent ....

This way the coil acts like a dielectric with infinite k value and because of its length and resistance restricts the amps.

The E field from the high voltage plate polarizes the coil and so very high electric fields can be applied to water with little amp consumption.

Title: Indupacitor
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 28, 2013, 22:36:38 pm
The inner tube must have amp restricting coil too otherwise the plates leaks electrons to the water...
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 28, 2013, 22:45:25 pm
what if you have two plates with only water in between and not around?
Could you not then use coils outside?
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 28, 2013, 23:35:09 pm
what if you have two plates with only water in between and not around?
Could you not then use coils outside?

Yes Steve this is exactly the thing i'm doing!

The water is going to stay only in the region between the inner and outer tube...

i decided to make this way because is easier to make the coils...

Theres going to be one coil outside of the outer tube and one inside of the inner tube!  Fields adding each other!!!

This forms the so called voltage zones...
Title: ?????????
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 30, 2013, 10:14:20 am
 8) 8) 8) 8)

I'm using 30 awg wire and planing to make more than 10 layers

I found a fundamental relation between this geometry and tesla coil. Tesla talked about undamped oscillations... this kind of geometry where the capacitance field lines pass thru the inductor in my point of view is pretty much different than the situation where there is a capacitor and inductor simply electrically connected... since the coil becomes part of the capacitance and must have electric fields in the dielectric coating of the coils.

Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 30, 2013, 10:42:01 am
I can read that you have fun Fabio  :)
Use the tubes as core is fine.
But what kind of material is your tube?
Try to use soft iron or ss430, which has ferro in it.
I have plenty of the magnetic Ss400 serie plates here, so if you need plates, just ask and it will be on its way to south america... 8)
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 30, 2013, 11:10:33 am
I really think that this ferritic tubes could be much better!!!  Another great improvement could be to have a cut all the way in the tube so that it don't form a short turn....   to the coils
 
Look at my outer tube voltage zone prototype

i just measured 74uf indeed really really high... !!!!! between the aluminum foil and the tube having between a coil with insulation tape on each layer.



Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 30, 2013, 11:16:10 am
Didnt you measure current leakage? 47uf is hugh for such a little one
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 30, 2013, 11:27:13 am
Didnt you measure current leakage? 47uf is hugh for such a little one

Yes this capacitance is really high but i guess it can be some interference in the reading since its a lrc meter which uses frequency to measure... and this is not a simple capacitor but an equivalent of a capacitor in almost parallel but also in series with a capacitor....with only one plastic layer insulation tape and a tube the capacitance should still somehow  small...

i don't know but i was hoping that is exactly what i need... an equivalent to high dielectric constants...

just measured again and the test used is DC method.. same result...
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 30, 2013, 20:57:54 pm
ok, you added some insulation....
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on August 01, 2013, 00:03:14 am
sorry steve i almost edited your post by mistake ...  :P


Yes the outer conductor (electrode) is not connected to the coil and there is also a plastic tape insulation maybe 1 or to maximum turns of tape and one turn at each layer of coil... the coil is connected to the inner tube anyhow... internally... i didn't connected to the outer electrode just for measuring purpose but should be connected in function...

if you make the equivalent circuit than its exactly the vic matrix impedance circuit!!!

It ends up that the coil is inside the capacitor and thus it forms a resonant tank and the electric fields of such capacitor are acting directly at the polarization in the coil...in macroscopic manner..


In theory if this work than its exactly what meyer talks about all the time! Restricting amps to allow voltage do work in a dead short condition. If the amps are not allowed to flow no power is consumed of course.

I mean maybe meyer was trying to improve the tay he han patent idea or working in parallel in the same concepts!!! very strange !!! anyway is hard to say nowadays...

But if that is so than there can be some sort of pulsing style that is possible to benefit if its applied at the resonant frequency of the circuit!
If amps are restricted the electric fields applied to the water can be really high.

Pulsing at the resonant frequency makes sense since the capacitance part of the circuit gets charged first and the coils get charged with some current during charge times, and then the capacitor must discharge thru the coil after in parallel and as such the coil reverts polarity wow strange lot of stuff. 

The idea is that the high voltage pass thru 90º ahead of current like stan constantly speaks about...

I think the coil will save the insulation from suffering high stress somehow....
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on August 01, 2013, 00:48:56 am
I'm using for design all this, all the fundamentals of physics like as conductor should not have an electric field inside of it... (the coil) the geometry, the electrodes... The electric fields...

the needed electric field required to make water become gas should be around the 25kv/mm


Together, external magnetic field (71), inductance coupling field (512a xxx 512n), resistive value (Z2 + Z3) of stainless steel wire-coil (56/62), and the dielectric value (ohmic or resistive value) (Re> of water aids and performs amp restriction process (520) of Figure (5-3) while allowing applied voltage amplitude to be electrically transmitted without signal degradation. (see circuit resistive equations (Eq 9) ( Memo WFC 420, once again) as to VIC Matrix Circuit (690) of Figure (7-8).
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on August 06, 2013, 17:32:30 pm
I found that my LRC meter is not doing good measures... I think the cables are somehow bad contacts or shorted in someway...

trying to solve that to do more measurements...
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on August 07, 2013, 19:49:18 pm
I fixed the LCR meter and at this time it measures 180pf for the small test cell i constructed.... As i suspected the coil layers don't interfere in the capacitance since a metal simply cant have electric field inside of it!

I'm going to evaluate the ability to restrict amps and electric field inside the cell...
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on August 09, 2013, 10:03:38 am
I fixed the LCR meter and at this time it measures 180pf for the small test cell i constructed.... As i suspected the coil layers don't interfere in the capacitance since a metal simply cant have electric field inside of it!

I'm going to evaluate the ability to restrict amps and electric field inside the cell...

ok, 180pf is more realistic.
Good luck and have fun!
Title: Re: electric field screening
Post by: Login to see usernames on August 14, 2013, 18:15:13 pm
Man now that i'm working i got some resources to invest in my little project... I'm having lot of fun now doing coils and tests and people here around really believe its possible..

180 pf is like almost the a tenth of the capacitance of the water tube but it will be leaky as well ...  so there can be a minimum amp flow to stop the screening of the charge.. maybe lowering the electric field needed to split the ions thru water molecules and cause collisions...