Ionizationx: a clean environment is a human right!

General => General Discussion => Topic started by: Dankie on June 07, 2009, 03:37:07 am

Title: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 07, 2009, 03:37:07 am
I have heard of this , if this true .

That meyers was gating and pulsing with 2 transistors , one at the negative side of primary coil and one at positive side .

Somebody plz brg this up from the patent I I can maybe put a possible add-on for this , Its just a slight modification .
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 07, 2009, 04:26:56 am
i have read stans tech explaining the signals going to the vic many times.. my clearest understanding up to today is that stans has the pwm operating from both sides of the primary... 1 transistor on the positve side of primary is gating a solid positve analog signal matching the duty cycle.. ..  it is variable from 0-12 volt analog pulses(i think the varable is dependent on duty cycles pulse width).. then on the negative side of the primary its transistor is in sync with the analogs gating (duty cycle) and is gating digital signal with the frequency... stan says he can charge for 15 seconds and produce for 84 seconds on off put stage.. he calls the 94 secs a off put stage so i feel as if hes charging the transformer up and resonating during discharge with a frequency gating with analog side off to alow it to return to ground. its not electric that is seperating the water as much as it is physical force and timing..   people wounder why there isnt current across the cell, that is a simple answer..


it has to do with the laws of attraction and mutual inductance..  the charges building on the core build evenly so they have balance when charging like +500 and -500 is balanced in the chokes and will require more work to cross the water cell then to just capacitate in the vic.. but if you dont have matching coils then you can get a build up of like +500 and -700(caused by difenerent length chokes) and it will lead to a constant current in the cell  negative flowing to positve...if it is +700 and -500 you still get negative flowing to postive but think of the forces involved the positve 700 is more like a vacuum to the negative thats where E.E.C. comes in, the other processes are stricly vibration energy.. being created by pulsating static fields and tuning to the vibration that throws the electrons furthest out of equalibrium like the pendium.. all about timing.. stans quote says a simple physical process.. we know the only thing physical(to move)   water is static.. static is potenial built up in a material of either pos or neg potentials(skinn effect)... so i would say you are hitting water with somthin similar to a sound wave hitting water except that your physical vibration wave isnt due to a object of physical mater vibrating the water, but a vibration of static force physical/ atomicaly interacting with the water.... this is where i stand at the moment but you guys know me, my perspective are all over the place.. this one seems accurate to me.
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 07, 2009, 06:39:47 am
This is not shown in the common vic diagram but it may be shown in the controll and driver circuits patent. I am trying to think of an advantage to manipulating both sides of the primary compared to just one, the only thing I can think of so far is to use some feedback from the vic circuit in the circuit that connects to the tail end of the primary, but I dono if that makes sence 
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 07, 2009, 07:17:30 am
somebody brging me proof of this from the papers.

Too lazy now .
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 07, 2009, 11:00:32 am
Well, if there is any circuitry on the secondary (I doubt there is other then the pumping diode due to the HV...not many solid states around that can handle it)
The advantage would be that the secondary swings both ways and a standard rectifier bridge would give out double frequency but at 1/2 the voltage because an AC oscillation's voltage is the difference between the + and -...and using both outputs would give a greater potential difference....with that being said I would like to point out the pumping diode again...and how the way Stan shows it...the BEMF can only go one way  ;) ...so, again I would probably have to say that attempting to modulate the output in any way is a waste of time...(you want the output to oscillate freely in most RLC circuit....this is a non linear resonance though...so it's a lil different)
Now, if he used both sides of a signal B4 the secondary is another matter...I have read many patents and some say different things...but, some ARE different things :D
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 07, 2009, 11:44:32 am
Dankie,

The only difference is that you can get a sinewave into your primairy coil, when you use a 2 transistor setup. That can work, if you have a 3 wire primairy.
http://www.aaroncake.net/circuits/inverter.asp
http://www.aaroncake.net/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=7123

I personally like the second one better.

Both circuits putting out a sinewave, which can be controlled in frequency.
The frequency range is limited by the propertys of the toroid.

Steve
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 07, 2009, 20:02:52 pm
so anybody find this ?
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 07, 2009, 20:10:20 pm
i posted the main points highlighted like a month ago, let me find them and i will repost here and show the main points that im trying to share.. the more times i read it the more clear it becomes.. but try to understand what creates signal 49axxx49n.. from what i gathered the way that the analog on positve side and the digital on the negative side interact with each other is what defines signal 49axxx49n
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 07, 2009, 20:27:30 pm
Those circuits are half-bridge and full bridge circuits. There is more info here:

http://www.fairchildsemi.com/an/AN/AN-9012.pdf#page=1
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 07, 2009, 22:08:44 pm
the main description,

Voltage Intensifier Circuit (60)
By integrating and joining together variable voltage amplitude control signal (318 xxx 32n) of
Figure (3-15)  WITH variable controlled switch-gate (49a xxx 49n) of Figure (3-18) across primary coil
(26) of Figure (3-22), variable amplitude pulse-train (51a xxx 51n) of Figure (3-19) is
electromagnetically coupled (transformer action) TO secondary coil (52) of Figure (3-22) by way of
pulsing core (53) of Figure (3-23) as to Figure (3-22).

the negative side
Cell Driver Circuit (90)
In either case, the resultant or varied pulse train (47a xxx 47n) (calibration of 44a xxx 44n)
becomes incoming gated pulse signal (48) of figure (3-5) to cell driver circuit (90) of Figure (3-5)
which performs a switching function by switching "off' and "on" electric ground being applied to
opposite side (48) of primary coil (26) of Figure (3-19). The resultant pulse wave form (49a xxx 49n)
of Figure (3-18) superimposed onto primary coil (26) is exact duplicate of proportional pulse train (47a
xxx 47n). However, each pulse train (47) (49) are electrically isolated from each other. Only voltage
cross-over from regulated power supply (150) of Figure (3-6) to battery supply (28) occurs, as
illustrated in Figure (3-6).

the positive side,
Analog voltage signal (32a xxx 32n) of Figure (3-15) allows pulse train (51a xxx 51n) voltage
amplitude (VO xxx Vn) of Figure (3-19) to vary from one up to twelve volts


i have a feeling that the negative choke is being gated with or to the negative side of primary as well...  and the negative side of the secondary is connected to isloated ground from primary not the choke i think... i see the chokes being able to induct the uprise of voltage due to the mutual induction of the core during  the rise of secondaries from pulsing primary, but i do not see a clear signal being produced in the chokes.. so i see stan gating the negative excitor chokes charge.. by doing so i see a high negative excitor field trying to colapse to ground with  restricted current due to frequency gating and stainless 430 fr resistance. in a sense you are coupling primary to secondary through the water... the positve plate is the secondary side and the negative is the primary.. by doing so i think you couple the signal to where your primary signal is matching your secondary with precision.. coupled by water.. the negative choke will still have the  balanced opposite potential due to mutual inductance of the bifilar wind.
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 08, 2009, 06:49:53 am
Thats some good research you did outlaw .

Thx .

Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 08, 2009, 07:57:45 am
thanks,  this project is driving me crazy lol..   this quote says it all

" No one ever dreamed of using opposite electrical voltage, Being pulsed in a sequential mode in order to perform the work to split the water molecule in a simple physical process. Now isnt that amazing?"
 

on another note lets switch our relativity to super slow motion for a second.. 1 full analog pulse could vary from 0-12 volts.. it is not a square wave, it is climbing in time  startin at 0 and up to 12..  then it drops like a square wave..  now what happens when primarys negative side connection to ground is being gated... you have a interation of solid incoming positve analog signal being switched on and off on the neg side.. this all is happening in time and in sync.. so if the analog if solid and its getting switched in a on and off manner on the other side of the primary.. what is going on, on the core when the ground is off but the analogs still climbing while thats happening.. could that 50 percent off put time of the frequency be the frequency double?  when the gate turns ground back on???
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 08, 2009, 12:26:10 pm
Dankie,

The only difference is that you can get a sinewave into your primairy coil, when you use a 2 transistor setup. That can work, if you have a 3 wire primairy.
http://www.aaroncake.net/circuits/inverter.asp
http://www.aaroncake.net/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=7123

I personally like the second one better.

Both circuits putting out a sinewave, which can be controlled in frequency.
The frequency range is limited by the propertys of the toroid.

Steve
The first circuit looks like a VCO:
http://sss-mag.com/cvco.html
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 08, 2009, 13:28:23 pm
thanks,  this project is driving me crazy lol..   this quote says it all

" No one ever dreamed of using opposite electrical voltage, Being pulsed in a sequential mode in order to perform the work to split the water molecule in a simple physical process. Now isnt that amazing?"
 

on another note lets switch our relativity to super slow motion for a second.. 1 full analog pulse could vary from 0-12 volts.. it is not a square wave, it is climbing in time  startin at 0 and up to 12..  then it drops like a square wave..  now what happens when primarys negative side connection to ground is being gated... you have a interation of solid incoming positve analog signal being switched on and off on the neg side.. this all is happening in time and in sync.. so if the analog if solid and its getting switched in a on and off manner on the other side of the primary.. what is going on, on the core when the ground is off but the analogs still climbing while thats happening.. could that 50 percent off put time of the frequency be the frequency double?  when the gate turns ground back on???

" No one ever dreamed of using opposite electrical voltage, Being pulsed in a sequential mode in order to perform the work to split the water molecule in a simple physical process. Now isnt that amazing?"

Well, he also said: Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition......


Both sentenses doesn't make any sense, do they....

Hope some body can explain what here really meant.

Steve

Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 08, 2009, 14:30:45 pm
Quote
" No one ever dreamed of using opposite electrical voltage, Being pulsed in a sequential mode in order to perform the work to split the water molecule in a simple physical process. Now isnt that amazing?"

Well, he also said: Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition......


Both sentenses doesn't make any sense, do they....

Hope some body can explain what here really meant.

they make perfect sense when you understand force.

lets start with   "Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition"

to praise-  the offering of grateful homage in words or song, as an act of worship: a hymn of praise to God.

god is knowlege..lifes a war of balance evil uses bullets for ammunition.. the wise (gods people) use words of wisdom and great knowlege for there ammunition.. its the difference in harmonic and non harmonic.. god is harmonic

so he means to fight evil with knowlege as your weapon..


now for the other one

" No one ever dreamed of using opposite electrical voltage, Being pulsed in a sequential mode in order to perform the work to split the water molecule in a simple physical process. Now isnt that amazing?"

the three main words of interest-  opposite electrical voltage (potential), sequential mode, and physical process..

we know what opposite potential is and how to create it right? ok we know this and we know stan made the plates hold a static charge giving a skin effect. but some reason people cant get away from amps.. amps are a chemical process when the electrons are flowing through the water and into the circuit.. you will get energy loss due to heat and friction in the water from overkill electron flow..

imagine the vibrations of a speacker, stan used audio range waves between 0-20khz up to and beyond 40kv in some cases with under 1 amp of current across water. so you know a subwoorfer can cause a physical impact with your body from a distance (feel the vibrations).. well what about static fields being pulsed in a audio  range.. static can create a physical force on water without touch from a distance, but the best part is static potentials interaction is a little different then traveling wave of oscillating object such as a speaker that creates a wave from the force of movement of the specker cone... static voltage interacts atomicaly.. the positve  creates a pull on electrons, while the negative creates a pull on the proton..

now what stan means by sequential mode is not totaly clear to me yet.. i know timing is everything .. the sequential mode to me means either 2 things
1. he could be switch the excitor plates on and off at different and same time in a pattern...(*note* by doing so would not classify it as alternating current since switching them on and off doesnt involve flopping the polarity to do so.)

2 or he just uses it to describe his step up pulse and hitting both excitors at the same time,  not alternating their on and off to differ from each other.. and he refers to that pulse as a sequene since its happening in repition

he says a simple physical process because hes drumming the cell with static force, not a moving force like the physical moving object speaker to send wave...

hope this help..


Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 08, 2009, 16:46:48 pm
Outlaw,

Let me tell you what i undertstand when i read all this.

opposite electrical voltage = not the same electrical voltage or potential difference
Example: +12V   opposite=-12V
But only against a common electrode or ground, so to speak.

Sequential mode: = shifting between one and another. In this case: first you pulse +12V and then -12V against a common ground.
So how in practice? Use 3 plates, or 3 tubes. The electrode in the middle should be the common.

What would be the effect of such a setup on water? Well, in my theory, you still have current running, so it stays electrolysis.

If sequential mode means that both the +12V and -12V are powerd on and off  with help of a timer, then what do we get?
Do we not have 24V across the outer plates? Still current running? Still electrolysis?

Steve , just thinking out loud on the forum
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 08, 2009, 17:39:47 pm
steve,

these are good questions and a good way of uniting the simpleest view of whats going on..
Quote
opposite electrical voltage = not the same electrical voltage or potential difference
Example: +12V   opposite=-12V
But only against a common electrode or ground, so to speak.
Sequential mode: = shifting between one and another. In this case: first you pulse +12V and then -12V against a common ground.
So how in practice? Use 3 plates, or 3 tubes. The electrode in the middle should be the common.

What would be the effect of such a setup on water? Well, in my theory, you still have current running, so it stays electrolysis.

If sequential mode means that both the +12V and -12V are powerd on and off  with help of a timer, then what do we get?
Do we not have 24V across the outer plates? Still current running? Still electrolysis?



there are only 2 tubes in stans set up and it would be complicating to jump to 3 at the moment but it does sound interesting..

sequential mode= shifting between one another.. i like that thought but i think it is a little more complicated then 1,2,1,2,1,2 (1=pos and 2=neg shift)   i think its 1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3 (1= pos, 2= both, and 3= neg)   since that sequence starts on one and end on three then repeats, it keeps sending a unipolar pulse.. think of each step... step one positve on= pull on electrons push on proton... step 2 both= stability pulse to the protons? step 3  negative on= a deflection of electron and pull on the proton..  its either 1,2,1,2,1,2 or the 1,2,3,1,2,3

.

i think it may be the 1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3 becasue the alternator could use its 3 seperate phases to create that effect.. like phase one you would leave the negative choke disconected from the cell, phase 2 both chokes conected, and 3 just the neg conected.. the alternator is geometricaly configured to have 120degee out peaks.. so by coneecting it like that you can hit 1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3..
there is no current because of the transformer design.. it is a transformer

if its not them then it could as well be both,both,both,both.. that sounds way simple to replicate with vic 6-1, or it may need 3 to do the job and have their primarys hit in sync...

the key to restricting current is the transformer.. it does 2 jobs  capacitor and step up in voltage.. the slots between the pancakes is where the charge is being held, not in the water... when it is charging up you are for one using a low signal to help in not creating amps.. he relys on step up to get it from the low input (leverage)   since the chokes are the same length and are right next to each other, when the charge is building the electrons dont leave the core, they are just being manifested into the negative side of the secondary..   opposite potential build on the same core (+ and - choke)   will stay on the choke as long as they build in sync... when they separate they have a magntic attraction to each other while there separating on the core.. like a north and south pole sitting next to each other they are pulling on each other.. them pulling on the core in balance makes it more work for the electrons to cross the water so now you create the skin effect on the + and - ...  so buy chargeing up, then gating the charge back to ground you are allowing that skinn effect to produce a oscillation in the cell... like a speaker hitting air, but its voltage hitting water.
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 08, 2009, 22:12:39 pm
Well, Outlaw,

I like to keep it simple and practicle.
I like to discus this with you.  :)
At the end you talk about a charge in the chokes/coils transformer. Well, what happens when the power is off? What happens to the charge in those nice coils?

Accoording to the knowledge i have, you will have a discharge. That discharge will happen very quick. Meaning: lots of amps  in a short periode. With a bifcoil you can slow the discharge, but it will happen....

Maybe we should look at things as they are. If you see the drawing of Stans alternator schematic, you see he uses 1 with and 1 without chokes. The only reason to use chokes is to reduce current, as Stan said. Why you think he needed that?
Well, from my tests, i can tell you that if you have a very large wfc with tubes in parallel, your totall resistance will be very very low.
Like 0.1ohm. What happens with yr alternator? Well, the cell pulls so massive amps that the alternator will smoke up.
To control and to be able to have a big wfc, he added some chokes, to keep amps under control.
I know. I tried. I proved it.  ;)

Steve




Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 09, 2009, 00:05:43 am
what would happen to the lower transitor ?

Blow up ?
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 09, 2009, 04:04:22 am
This guy called Dr. Koontz was on coast to coast on 6/6/09. He shared some insight into Stan's work. The Keyword is SCALAR RESONANCE.
The WFC unit has a scalar resonance freq. of 6k.

Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 09, 2009, 05:06:45 am
Quote
Accoording to the knowledge i have, you will have a discharge. That discharge will happen very quick. Meaning: lots of amps  in a short periode. With a bifcoil you can slow the discharge, but it will happen..

if this is true then why would stan state on video that with a 15 second on put time he could continue to produce gas for 94 seconds during what he called off put time...

how is a capacitor made?  with a dielectic between parellel conductors right? ..

Quote
At the end you talk about a charge in the chokes/coils transformer. Well, what happens when the power is off? What happens to the charge in those nice coils?

i think during the 94 second  off put time he is still gating negative side of the primary where  the negative choke is also conected  (not to secondary)  and he is using common ground to dicharge the transformer in a gated manner.. so you are still drumming the water even when powers off. then when it needs to charge up again the postive side of primary turns back on. and adds the analog pulse.. analog is the variable amplitude..

think really hard on this senario.. the choke wire, lets say both are exactly 500 ft.. now think of that wire not as a line/string but pretend you are the size of a flea standing next to 26awg..  the fleas perspective in a size to size ratio.. the wire is like 3 foot tall and 5 miles long....to the flea that wire has great volume... what if that wire was a air tank and wasnt solid?  to the flea that tank can hold alot of volume under preasure..  so if we can except that wire has volume like a air tank you start to see potentials a little diff..

now what if one tank (wire) is a little longer (bigger) then the other? ask your self what happens to 2 air tanks if one is bigger then the other? well the bigger tank will require more air then the other to have the same pressure.. you could have the 2 air tanks (wire) hooked to 2 different pumps (emf) of the same force the smaller tank will peak quicker then the bigger tank (wire)  thats why they are of same length but there is still more to it for understanding why the charge stays on the core and not in the water..

now why does it.. well think of the 2 tanks again.. these tanks are wound side by side.. the positve having a diode is pulling electrons out and sending/manifesting/ deflecting  them into the secondary... so the chokes charge is  pos potential (vaccum/ positive polarity)
the negative choke potential (pressure negative polarity)  since the 2 wire are the same length they will charge at a even pace.. the negative is charging it self through ground, ,and is pulling electrons in.. the rising polarity of positive is causing negative to induct the charge into itself..  when it is charged (the transformer not the cell)  the charge does not leave because the 2 wires are the same length,  they are sitting right next to each other and have opposite charges in them.. that are happy on the core,...  so what happens if you introduce the neg choke to a gated ground? will it oscillate and discharge slowly drumming the cell with voltage?

im not saying im right on this but i feel like im close


stans drawing i think can be missleading.. to simple..
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 09, 2009, 05:44:58 am
your link is busted yaro , I'd like to listen to this plz.

This is important , somebody get that audio .
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 09, 2009, 06:07:03 am
http://disc.yourwebapps.com/discussion.cgi?disc=149495;article=124656;title=APFN

i think this is it
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 09, 2009, 06:44:01 am
Thats just some buzz aldrin crap
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 09, 2009, 10:59:01 am
Quote
Accoording to the knowledge i have, you will have a discharge. That discharge will happen very quick. Meaning: lots of amps  in a short periode. With a bifcoil you can slow the discharge, but it will happen..

if this is true then why would stan state on video that with a 15 second on put time he could continue to produce gas for 94 seconds during what he called off put time...

how is a capacitor made?  with a dielectic between parellel conductors right? ..

Quote
At the end you talk about a charge in the chokes/coils transformer. Well, what happens when the power is off? What happens to the charge in those nice coils?

i think during the 94 second  off put time he is still gating negative side of the primary where  the negative choke is also conected  (not to secondary)  and he is using common ground to dicharge the transformer in a gated manner.. so you are still drumming the water even when powers off. then when it needs to charge up again the postive side of primary turns back on. and adds the analog pulse.. analog is the variable amplitude..

think really hard on this senario.. the choke wire, lets say both are exactly 500 ft.. now think of that wire not as a line/string but pretend you are the size of a flea standing next to 26awg..  the fleas perspective in a size to size ratio.. the wire is like 3 foot tall and 5 miles long....to the flea that wire has great volume... what if that wire was a air tank and wasnt solid?  to the flea that tank can hold alot of volume under preasure..  so if we can except that wire has volume like a air tank you start to see potentials a little diff..

now what if one tank (wire) is a little longer (bigger) then the other? ask your self what happens to 2 air tanks if one is bigger then the other? well the bigger tank will require more air then the other to have the same pressure.. you could have the 2 air tanks (wire) hooked to 2 different pumps (emf) of the same force the smaller tank will peak quicker then the bigger tank (wire)  thats why they are of same length but there is still more to it for understanding why the charge stays on the core and not in the water..

now why does it.. well think of the 2 tanks again.. these tanks are wound side by side.. the positve having a diode is pulling electrons out and sending/manifesting/ deflecting  them into the secondary... so the chokes charge is  pos potential (vaccum/ positive polarity)
the negative choke potential (pressure negative polarity)  since the 2 wire are the same length they will charge at a even pace.. the negative is charging it self through ground, ,and is pulling electrons in.. the rising polarity of positive is causing negative to induct the charge into itself..  when it is charged (the transformer not the cell)  the charge does not leave because the 2 wires are the same length,  they are sitting right next to each other and have opposite charges in them.. that are happy on the core,...  so what happens if you introduce the neg choke to a gated ground? will it oscillate and discharge slowly drumming the cell with voltage?

im not saying im right on this but i feel like im close


stans drawing i think can be missleading.. to simple..

I do not have all the answers, Outlaw,
But have you watched a wfc and see what happend when you take the power from it? Indead, it keeps on going producing for a long time. Maybe that is the fenomenon Stan is talking about.

Your theory about a battery like coil, is a nice one. But in practice, i do not think it will work. The discharge is so quick. Not sure if you can regulate that. Not sure if there are components who can do that either.
And what will be the gain?  You need time to charge the battery like coil and that costs time and amps. Then you lease it slowly as you can. Still it will be electrolysis. So, no gain here. No new technology.
Maybe you win some by result of better impedance matching. ;)

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

Maybe we must start to think about which effects we wanna see. What the results must be. Maybe then, we create a technology that fits well.
Do we hunt a mans idea that voltage is doing work? No amps? Well, Stan stated himself that we do need amps. The testreport mentions 40 amps on the wfc.

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

The only thing i found, is that you can play with hydrogen molecules and activate them. That has been proven.

So, it more likely that Stan used simple electrolysis in a most efficient way. Then fouled around with the gas and then put it in the engine.
All the lies about 1700% more effiency is crap. That was stated by dummys who were looking at a system and didnt understand what they seen.
It was the alternator setup. As you can see on nthe schematics os Stan, he has put the ampmeter and the voltmeter on the rotor.
Result: 5V and 1 or 2 amps.
Gasproduction thru the roof!!!!!!!WOWOWOWOWOW
BUT: they forget the powerconsumption of the drivermotor of at least 1hp. aka 750watts.

Well, we all know by know that many of us make the same results with 750watts. At least i do.

The injector on Stans car is not injecting water. Its injecting HHO.
And that HHO was produced in a wfc with plates and no tubes. Stan only showed the tubes as example for the patent office. I know. I seen the buggy idle video. He used his testcell there as well.

I think we need people who can run an engine on a WFC and then go from there. My advise: go built a nice platecell. Get an engine running and then develope a gasprocessor and injectors.
Thats my opion on how Stan made his bug running.

Steve
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 09, 2009, 14:17:09 pm
this is bob koontz on coast to coast 6-6-09
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 09, 2009, 15:51:20 pm
Quote
I dont want to sound negative here, but i do want you guys to keep your head out of the clouds. Its hard. This hobby is tough.

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

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

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


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

 to get a 70 pound bowling ball to float in the air john hutchinson built 2 tesla coils around 1mega volt.. then faced them in opposition to each other.. the same idea of stans fields across the cell. .. i would say he had them place with one below and one above.. i would also say the bowling ball was manifesting its electrons to either top or bottom and for a moment in time had its own north and south poles just like earth..
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 09, 2009, 16:07:40 pm
here are the other 2 bob koontz
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 09, 2009, 16:33:16 pm
Outlaw,

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

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

Steve
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 09, 2009, 16:35:57 pm
thx outlaw
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 09, 2009, 17:30:57 pm


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


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

Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 09, 2009, 17:53:21 pm

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

We know Meyers cell was cold to the touch so maybe

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

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






Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 09, 2009, 19:34:39 pm
@Waytogo
Yes...electrolysis is "HOT" because electrons are being crammed into the water creating friction...which creates heat. Meyer's process doesn't allow electrons in....instead he "POTENTIALIZES" the water's electrons and then provides an energy "sink" for them. So it's cool because electrons are leaving!!!
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 09, 2009, 20:24:59 pm
I found this link at panaceauniversity.org:

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

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

Regards,
Andy
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 09, 2009, 22:43:15 pm
@Waytogo
Yes...electrolysis is "HOT" because electrons are being crammed into the water creating friction...which creates heat. Meyer's process doesn't allow electrons in....instead he "POTENTIALIZES" the water's electrons and then provides an energy "sink" for them. So it's cool because electrons are leaving!!!

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

Steve
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 10, 2009, 02:34:46 am
@Steve
It's no myth, and, is clearly laid out for all to read and understand...even Naudin notes the adiabatic flow of charge...see also adiabatic ionization ;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adiabatic_ionization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adiabatic_ionization)
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 10, 2009, 03:02:35 am
Steve , stop being so negative in my threads .

Here is a cool video .

feature=channel_page

Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 10, 2009, 10:32:12 am
Steve , stop being so negative in my threads .

Here is a cool video .

feature=channel_page

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

Steve
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 10, 2009, 10:47:22 am
@Steve
It's no myth, and, is clearly laid out for all to read and understand...even Naudin notes the adiabatic flow of charge...see also adiabatic ionization ;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adiabatic_ionization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adiabatic_ionization)

Hi radiant,

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

Steve

Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 10, 2009, 10:55:24 am
Here is a cool video .

feature=channel_page

nice video, btw
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 10, 2009, 13:35:24 pm
what would happen to the lower transitor ?

Blow up ?
I'd put the gate frequency on the enable pin of the primary frequency 555, to prevent crosstalk.
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 10, 2009, 17:58:29 pm
Quote
Steve , stop being so negative in my threads .

Here is a cool video .

feature=channel_page



@ dankie

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

endothermic = harmonic        exothermic = non harmonic..


imagine a tornado  and its flows of energy...

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

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

harmonic energy is what drives the growth of forest and life..   i would say the silent harmonic energy that drives growth is sunlight.
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 10, 2009, 21:16:42 pm
Quote
Hi radiant,

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

Steve



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


P.S.
I belonged to a skype water fuel chat group...and, I purposed the insulated electrode WAY before Naudin ever did it. I had VERY heated discussions with the head of Energeticforum (before there was an energeticforum) over this exact issue....it ended with him saying "I said this to begin with" :D
Then a couple months later Naudin tried it out...it is by no way HIS theory...neither is it MINE...it was my interpretation of various things Stan said + my own understanding of how you get voltage to do work w/o amp leakage.
As for your replication of Naudin and "knowing" it was leaking amps....your setup was NOT Naudins...and, he definitely showed an increase in capacitor action...if it leaked, that's fine....it still shows step charging and increase of overall charge. However, even Naudin's replication is not perfect...he only reached 1Kv...Stan notes around 16-20Kv!!
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 10, 2009, 22:14:51 pm
I agree , Naudin dont give a crap about hiding anything from you .

He already replicated multiple OU technologies .

Now stop being so negative . This skeptical stuff is getting on my nerves .
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 11, 2009, 11:26:16 am
Quote
Hi radiant,

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

Steve



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


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

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

Dankie: i just send you a PM.

Steve


Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 11, 2009, 11:44:14 am
Very cool...but I bet NOT ONE OF YOU HAD AN EEC!  ???
Quote
Of course we seen hv and capacitance and resonance
If you have seen this...then the electrical stress MUST be translated across the water gap too (EEC works here)...
And as for the proof you speak of...I myself would also love to see some of your replication of Naudin ;)  (if it's on the forum somewhere I would love for you to show me)
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 11, 2009, 14:33:31 pm
Very cool...but I bet NOT ONE OF YOU HAD AN EEC!  ???
Quote
Of course we seen hv and capacitance and resonance
If you have seen this...then the electrical stress MUST be translated across the water gap too (EEC works here)...
And as for the proof you speak of...I myself would also love to see some of your replication of Naudin ;)  (if it's on the forum somewhere I would love for you to show me)

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

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

Steve
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 11, 2009, 16:18:30 pm
voltage collapsed through the water, at least you know amps were inhibited properly.

Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 11, 2009, 20:46:32 pm
Very cool...but I bet NOT ONE OF YOU HAD AN EEC!  ???
Quote
Of course we seen hv and capacitance and resonance
If you have seen this...then the electrical stress MUST be translated across the water gap too (EEC works here)...
And as for the proof you speak of...I myself would also love to see some of your replication of Naudin ;)  (if it's on the forum somewhere I would love for you to show me)

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

The EEC Electrojolt and i made was not involved in these tests.
Steve
Yes Steve and I worked on testing Naudin's Setup and we did replicate the same effect. The effect is: you have a semi-insulated cell, that gives you higher resistance, allowing to measure higher voltage across the electrodes, as current leaks from the insulation gaps, you see bubbles (electrolysis) and makes you think: Yehhhh I'm using voltage potential, Yehhhh, but then you measure how much gas it is making and compare that to straight DC and you realize that straight DC is more efficient. or Same power used in DC with more gas output.

But if most of you blind believers did some real testing you would know this by now.
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 11, 2009, 20:58:12 pm
No offense Steve...but, I read nothing of any resonance, you said you needed a bigger tube because your circuit couldn't reach 300Khz. I see no successful replication at all. Maybe you have talked to others that have...but, I would like to see proof.
Here's the difference Steve, I try and decipher a rather mysterious patent...I use my reading comprehension coupled with my knowledge of physics and electrical effects to hypothesize how it's operating. We know voltage potential is suppose to do work...we know that there is suppose to be IONIZED GAS....we know that AMPS ARE INHIBITED...I know how electricity REALLY works...and the "Poynting Flow" or voltage phenomena is the driving force, and that it's energy manipulates electrons and anti-electrons (Or whatever the counter flow is)....so I put the equation together and see it working in my mind....I offer MY OPINION!

You on the other hand are trying to tell us all "As a matter of fact" that it's a myth and that Naudin failed and it was just amps leaking...you say
Quote
Of course we seen hv and capacitance and resonance
, yet when you show your replication you have no such thing. So, I ask you...why do you speak from authority, saying "it's a myth...it's amp leakage making bubbles"?...when clearly you are skipping the whole basis of my interpretation!

If you make a perfect capacitor (even a good yet slightly leaky one)...just charging it will only create minimal gas...once charged YOU MUST RE-ROUTE THE CHARGE...disconnected from load so you don't create an energy sink that would draw more amps on the primary wire (this is the gating time of Meyer's system)...the charge is on the plates...AND ACROSS THE WATER/DIELECTRIC...you should read up on HOW to make ionized gas if you think my mode of operation is a "The Myth of Meyer"
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 11, 2009, 21:23:27 pm
@Electro

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

I'm not even gonna school you dude...keep on thinking you know what you're doin :D
I will say however, that comment is some ignorant shit!
It amazes me how people think their "replication" failure is somehow everyone's failure...too funny
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 11, 2009, 22:10:16 pm
We will see if there is something to Meyers and then I will move on to better things .

Stevie , you  havent read anything , you cant understand the patents or the language of the subtilities of such a science , and you just dont know enough about electronics or physics enough , in fact , you have went from one panacea copy to another ( we know how those end) .

Your assumptions are based on your results , wich are lacking for the reasons above .

Who ever said breaking multi-trilion dollar techologies would be easy .


Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 11, 2009, 23:19:09 pm
@Electro

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

I'm not even gonna school you dude...keep on thinking you know what you're doin :D
I will say however, that comment is some ignorant shit!
It amazes me how people think their "replication" failure is somehow everyone's failure...too funny

I'm going to chose to ignore you for calling me ignorant for now.
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 11, 2009, 23:47:03 pm
Jolt ,

nevermind the comments of radiant_1 , he is young and emotional .

Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 12, 2009, 00:43:24 am
Quote
.I know how electricity REALLY works...and the "Poynting Flow" or voltage phenomena is the driving force, and that it's energy manipulates electrons and anti-electrons (Or whatever the counter flow is)....so I put the equation together and see it working in my mind....I offer MY OPINION!

@ radiant_1


i see it exactly the same way.. thanks for sharing the words "Poynting Flow" ... so tell me this radiant, would you say that we are copying natures natural driving force (eaths driving forces) ?... the primary is sending a signal that is driving a core and resembles the same flow of earths atmosphere's   energy flow that makes it possible to read a compass?   a compass acting like a wind vein in these forces of flow?    


while the chokes energy flow resembles wind flow/ and TRADE winds?   occuring in seperate chokes??  postive flowing toward the south while negtive electrons travel north at the same time on the POLARIZED core?

remember how hurricanes spins 180 out from each other dependant upon which side of the equator they are on...   think on hurricanes learn there flows and what causes them to occur.. try to enlighten your self with what create's  turbulance in TRADE..  turbulance flow in a circuit can cause destruction and heat.. timing even trades of opposite pressure will create balance..  what is it trading? pressure for vacuum or vacuum for pressure, its vice versa.. Bi directional flow of energy..  

now relate this to the trade we are speaking of.. it will hopefully widen your perspective.. i know it sounds confusing but it holds many truths that explain the path of G.O.D and the path to overunity i think.. (i would say you can relate it like this question = vacuum/ positive volts and answer equals pressure/ - volts)       

For every question there’s an answer, for every answer there’s a question there the same in relation but there are two differences involved to get action (GAIN) , distortion and clarity. When you are born, distortion of our reality is at its highest. Its simple times of life, the beginning... the mind is not full of mixed signals created from experience that happens in time... its blind. As we go through life we find clarity in many things and it gives us a sense of enlightenment and or a sense of troubles... distortions and clarity can create gain working in opposition to each other. The gain is wisdom and the truth. One step forward towards the question will in return, bring you one step closer to the truth. Hey it may be a bumpy road but its builds character. What shows the truth? Reflection. They make us walk in circles now days(alternating current), surrounded by nothing but distortion (turbulance). Some of us have intuition gods people (postive direction of flow)... some have ignorance (neutral) the devils infantry. There is so much truth in this .if you don’t understand it read it again and again (PRACTICE/ CYCLES). Since each time you read it, it shall bring you one step closer to clarity and one step away from distortion (GAINS), at the same relative time it will bring you one step closer to intuitive instincts and one step away from ignorance at the same time hey its duality vice versa (DUAL GAINS ) !! Life has too many variables and complexities to predict and prepare ahead of the time in most cases... so the only thing you can do is BE prepare for the ride 24/7... And in the present time of relativity it seems like it might get ruff. So hold on tight and don’t shit yourself.


 i cant believe why you cant type g.o.d. on this site without it bleeping it out you used to be able to..  i guess some people got upset with me talking about g.o.d. on this site? one day you might understand why stan related this tech to g.o.d aka voltage (the main  force that we know of driving our universe.... maybe one day people will stop fearing stuff that is said and getting offended and just take it for whats its worth to you. until then i guess fear and dis belief  is the main drive for suppresion..  such as bleeping out g.o.d. lol
 
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 12, 2009, 03:05:25 am
@Dankie
Do not talk for me...do not excuse me...and do not attempt to minimize my words. I am only 24 but, have much life experience...I say what I mean and mean what I say.

@Jolt
I did not call you ignorant, I however, stand by my statement that what you said was ignorant because you have no idea (definition of ignorance)
I have no hard feelings, I just don't appreciate such patronizing assertions.
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 12, 2009, 03:16:53 am
I was going to let it pass, but due to your lack of respect, this is your second strike.
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 12, 2009, 03:22:30 am
@Outlawstc
 :o

You hit it on the head....I agree with your analogies most completely. It's a pleasure to see others expanding their horizons. You have made the connection...you see how existence is a fractal....everything is smaller or larger versions of the same! Different yet the same....

I will PM you later with my take on the longitudinal primary (that's exactly what Meyer lays out....I don't think he ever realized that epoch of design)

We have to remember that Stan was evolving his system....he was trying to achieve perfection in amp restriction. By turning the primary 90 degrees the interaction of coils would be a complex spiral that is a product...or a tangent of the two coils EM fields.
I will talk with you more about it.
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 12, 2009, 03:32:33 am
@Outlawstc
 :o

You hit it on the head....I agree with your analogies most completely. It's a pleasure to see others expanding their horizons. You have made the connection...you see how existence is a fractal....everything is smaller or larger versions of the same! Different yet the same....

I will PM you later with my take on the longitudinal primary (that's exactly what Meyer lays out....I don't think he ever realized that epoch of design)

We have to remember that Stan was evolving his system....he was trying to achieve perfection in amp restriction. By turning the primary 90 degrees the interaction of coils would be a complex spiral that is a product...or a tangent of the two coils EM fields.
I will talk with you more about it.

i am curious to hear more about the longitudinal primary, do you care to share a few more thoughts on it?
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 12, 2009, 03:36:55 am
@Jolt
Serious? My second strike?

That's funny, you say,
Quote
due to your lack of respect

But, what exactly would you call this?
Quote
But if most of you blind believers did some real testing you would know this by now.

I would say that's pretty disrespectful....I believe you took me wrong....I meant you have no idea of what I speak of, or where I come from.

What do u mean 2nd strike?...are u trying to intimidate me? Ur not an admin are u?
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 12, 2009, 04:18:19 am
@ radiant

Quote
You hit it on the head....I agree with your analogies most completely. It's a pleasure to see others expanding their horizons. You have made the connection...you see how existence is a fractal....everything is smaller or larger versions of the same! Different yet the same....

I will PM you later with my take on the longitudinal primary (that's exactly what Meyer lays out....I don't think he ever realized that epoch of design)

We have to remember that Stan was evolving his system....he was trying to achieve perfection in amp restriction. By turning the primary 90 degrees the interaction of coils would be a complex spiral that is a product...or a tangent of the two coils EM fields.



as for winding the core i say you would take somthin like a playing card in demension.. somthing that can cuff around the delrin bobbin and chokes windings.. stans says it is wound logitudinal in space relationship... when i speak of practice you need to read key points more then once.. you dont get much on one pass of reading.. when i read this tech i will repeat a sentience several times in a row in my head.. i practice.. which in return has brought clarity.. the answers stare us in the face everyday.. well at least the ones who read..
anyways back to the point.. space relationship and logitudinal are the right question.. anyone who knows cordinates and maps know that longitude lines on a map are traveling north to south.. ok now which side of the vic is north and which is south? they are the flat sides of the bobbin.. the chokes and secondary are wound east to west.. so you do the math.. which is north and south..   so maybe take the playing card wind flat 2-d lines on it.. with will make them bidirectional layed.. like stan says as well... now every piece of the puzzle fits in place.. word for word..     cuff it around the core with  wires running longitudinal..


yea i started catching on like 4 months ago.. its amazing how your views change when you understand. the basics..

so you also see how you can get way way way more heneries in one turn around the core? since you have to wind your way around the core and not wind your way down the core..


@donald
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 12, 2009, 06:16:39 am
thank you, that does explain a lot, very good description. i have never heard of this anywhere else before so it would be interesting to test, i don't know if it would work... but testing will determine.

if you were to take a single loop of wire and cover it in soap to make a bubble-film-layer, then the magnetic flux through the loop would go through one layer of bubble-film, meaning 1 turn, if you had two loops, the bubble-film would make 2 layers, for 2 turns, and if you had 100 loops, the magnetic flux would travel through 100 layers of bubble film for 100 turns... this is the concept of how the flux works and how 'turns' work, if you were to imagine a surface like bubble-film connecting all the loops, each layer through the coil increases the effect by so much.

so if you were to wrap a coil around a playing card, or piece of cardboard from a cereal box, and then wrap that around the primary bobbin cavity in the VIC, then all your bubble-layers would be in the center of the coil where the cardboard is, like a tall thin toroid, and your turns would count as the wraps around this cardboard, and yours flux path would be inside the coil... like a tall thin toroid... so how would this interact with the other coils?

all i can say is it is very interesting, and i hope a few of you try it, i'll try it when i get to that stage
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 12, 2009, 06:39:34 am
its pumping the core  to where the core is producing a "Poynting Flow".. this i think will cause the core to polarized giving it a north and south.. i have been preaching this for over 3 months.. sombody please try this concept.. i have a feeling its going to show great results... think how that signal will travel on a wind like the cuff... throw some views out of what you thinks going on in that case i would love to hear some perspectives

Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 12, 2009, 09:23:07 am
@Outlaw
While the coils are wound east-west...the wire has a spinning corkscrew of magnetic field around it....when you spiral the wire around a core, these corkscrews of EM energy all add together in series in a gearwise fashion. These spins all accumulate to create a double sided vortex of B-flow....in one end of the coil...out the other. The core acts as a flux path...where all magnetic fields are sucked into it...instead of being evenly distributed. This intensifies the field in a smaller area creating a much more intense localized vortex.
Look here
http://creatorguy.com/files/Ortho1.pdf

By crossing coils at 90 degree phase, you will create a complex spiraling B-field....this may intensify the field even more, by creating a ball, or torus of B-field in the center of the core...EMF simulation would need to be run to see what would happen for sure.

But, listen very intently to this video, especially when they describe what they call a "Tesla Extra Coil" (Not really an extra coil)...they talk about the winding creating a complex spiral that speeds up the wave propagation beyond the speed of light.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-721789270445596549&ei=jgIySomAEJX-qAPx6qzqAw&q=borderland+science+longitudinal+wave&hl=en&client=firefox-a (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-721789270445596549&ei=jgIySomAEJX-qAPx6qzqAw&q=borderland+science+longitudinal+wave&hl=en&client=firefox-a)

Also note the "transmission lines" they show, and note inductor and capacitor behavior in the two different configurations.
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 12, 2009, 13:40:54 pm
No offense Steve...but, I read nothing of any resonance, you said you needed a bigger tube because your circuit couldn't reach 300Khz. I see no successful replication at all. Maybe you have talked to others that have...but, I would like to see proof.
Here's the difference Steve, I try and decipher a rather mysterious patent...I use my reading comprehension coupled with my knowledge of physics and electrical effects to hypothesize how it's operating. We know voltage potential is suppose to do work...we know that there is suppose to be IONIZED GAS....we know that AMPS ARE INHIBITED...I know how electricity REALLY works...and the "Poynting Flow" or voltage phenomena is the driving force, and that it's energy manipulates electrons and anti-electrons (Or whatever the counter flow is)....so I put the equation together and see it working in my mind....I offer MY OPINION!

You on the other hand are trying to tell us all "As a matter of fact" that it's a myth and that Naudin failed and it was just amps leaking...you say
Quote
Of course we seen hv and capacitance and resonance
, yet when you show your replication you have no such thing. So, I ask you...why do you speak from authority, saying "it's a myth...it's amp leakage making bubbles"?...when clearly you are skipping the whole basis of my interpretation!

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

Radiant,

I promised you to show my NAudin tests. Later on, i tried other ideas.
What you suggest, is to use an EEC circuit to discharge the charge of the cap. Is that the trick accoording to your knowledge?
Please show us some of yr Naudin testsetup.

Steve
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 12, 2009, 16:50:58 pm
Quote
What you suggest, is to use an EEC circuit to discharge the charge of the cap. Is that the trick accoording to your knowledge?
Please show us some of yr Naudin testsetup.

sorry i know this was addressed to radiant but i would like to put my 2 cents in..

i dont see the capacitor taking on the charge you are thinking of.. the charge you speak of, "discharge" that would require current flow to happen...

it is a simple physical process  meaning the skin effect fields and potential in the plates are drumming on the water... no charge is going in or out the water through the plates... the charge build up in the cell is done by using the physical force to up the orbital spin of the electrons..  the drumming creates the scalor waves i beleive.. stan says the cell pumps itself.. well if there is any movement of water with NO moving parts i would say that is like antigravity of a fluid..

there are so many uses for this tech alot havent even came across yet.. like for instance this tech can be used to propulse underwater.. it can also be used to make a vehicle such as a figher jet be able to go from submarine (underwater) to flight..
if i can suggest anything to study in full other then water tech.. i would look into the electron particle generator...

stan said he would use the E.P.G. (electron particle gen) and the water fuel tech.. to power homes... he said it would be no bigger then a 4 foot tall hot water heater in design.. really listen to these next word because they are gold..

stan learned how to make a magnetic gas that would exist at room temp... gases of such do not exist at the moment in acedemia..  but i have noticed some speak of acknolegement such as i think radiant when we were talking about back emf and the bright spark when disonecting power source.. someone mentioned how the copper ions and what nots could bond which ambient air gases..

ok this magnetic gas is made from argon and metal.. stan built a sealed container that had electrodes in it with argon being fed into it.. using the vic to produce these magnetic gases.. so understand this vic and voltage is able to restructure atomicaly and makes the perodic table obsolete in  alot of ways when it comes to what can bond to what.

the secret to this is that when you put a magnetic gas in a closed loop tube.. that is being mirrored on the inside..  you can pump the gas with a primary wound on a ferrite that couples the glass tube.. (i think its glass, it hasnt been clears said what the material is.. but it is non conductive..  you can then wind secondarys right to the glass tube (no ferrite) this can produce power more effecient then todays conventional..

the ultimate secret.. is that stan figured out he could send light into the mirrored close looped core that has magnetic gas in it.. listen real carefully to the major point being made here..   when stan sends frequencyed coherent light into the tube, it doesnt create current!!!! (pumping gases through the tube.. the light alone makes the volt fields jump in the magnetic gases.).

in conclusion.. stan would use the vic to power a hydrogen laser to power the closed loop core..

all this i just posted is a gift from me to you.. just as g.o.d. would want it to see a gain as a whole. (no greed)
stan would have done the same except he knew in those days you couldnt just throw it out there.. since greed would take it away in a heart beat.. he has helped out in many ways and has stood up for the whole like no other.. well i cant say that.. tesla tried as well, so did victor schauberger.

viktor schauberger made a antigravity craft.. he made living water somthing we dont drink much these days since the water has turned bitter.. living water is charged water.. it could help heal in many ways.. i would say it is the REAL holy water..  he was screwed over and over again. then some americans went to him and offered him unlimited funds to develop stuff for the good.. for the people.. well guess where he was brought in the u.s.  TEXAS out in the middle of no where.. he was tricked into signing away all his work.. when he returned to i think austria he said they have taken EVERYTHING  from me they even own me.. he died like 3 days later.
ask your self who the ballers were in texas that did this to him? there were no names said but i could make a few guesses.
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 12, 2009, 17:21:08 pm
P.S. i would say the raising and lowering amplitude.. is causing manefistation in the cell... electons move toward the pos and protons move toward neg..    the discharge you are thinking of is not a discharge really your just pausing the pulse to let the water stableize then hitting it again upping its potential even further... your alowing it to fully take on one wave set, before hitting with another..
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 12, 2009, 21:28:23 pm
Stanley Meyer are just smiling in videos and pictures knowing that this time no one can take the idea from him..
Nobody took his ideas from him, for they couldn't understand what he did, but sadly his life was somehow taken from him.

feature=channel_page

He used volt for splitting water... Potential energy.... But we cant restrict the amps and at the same time have energy to use?... or can we?  for example if i am welding some steel parts together and connect the ground cable for my MIG welding apparatus to a wooden table with the parts i am welding on... no ground...but that dosent mean i can weld for free for ever does it?... NO i cant... no amp! and no HEAT... Hello i said NO AMP = NO HEAT

Stanleys WFC was COLD and he claimes close to NO AMP.... HE DID NOT USE AMPS (or current)

What did he do?.. WHAT DID HE DO?..  hmm the opposite of electrolysis......

Maybe the answer will come if we wish on a star :  



Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 12, 2009, 21:59:13 pm
you ever wounder why stan says you need more heneries then capacitance?..  answer anyone?
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 12, 2009, 22:10:39 pm
you ever wounder why stan says you need more heneries then capacitance?..  answer anyone?

Dude , go put ur ideas to work  .

Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 12, 2009, 22:29:52 pm
you ever wounder why stan says you need more heneries then capacitance?..  answer anyone?

Sure, basics.

The higher the inductance and the lower the capacitance, the narrower the bandwidth.

Steve
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 12, 2009, 23:09:41 pm
Quote
Dude , go put ur ideas to work
dude. . you need to stop trying to regulate peoples thought and when they should be posting and not posting..
Quote

Sure, basics.

The higher the inductance and the lower the capacitance, the narrower the bandwidth.

Steve


what if i said i saw it another way... i see  the more winds over the capacitance means the charge will be more magnetically attracted to the core for capacitance rather then the water to exchange and balance out... ???
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 12, 2009, 23:11:18 pm
you ever wounder why Stan says you need more heneries then capacitance?..  answer anyone?


Henry's is the unit symbol of inductance, You have one henry when  you use one amp per sec. and get one volt.

Capacitance is the ability for a capacitor to hold a electrical charge  .. for example in the WFC..

So i guess Stan meant you need more volt in the inductors than electrical charge in the tube cell.. for charging the tube cell is a dead short condition, and you can`t bring voltage up in a dead short condition he said.. ::).
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 12, 2009, 23:27:51 pm
Quote
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBfoQn1vmQE
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 12, 2009, 23:44:37 pm
Quote
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBfoQn1vmQE

So, that is really strange........!
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 13, 2009, 01:04:32 am
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 13, 2009, 01:34:29 am
incredibly revealing .

Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 13, 2009, 03:21:46 am
http://ocw.mit.edu/ans7870/8/8.02T/f04/visualizations/electrostatics/30-vdgdischarge/30-vdgdischarge320.html
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 14, 2009, 11:15:00 am
you ever wounder why stan says you need more heneries then capacitance?..  answer anyone?
in terms of reactance, yes, to let voltage lead current by +-90 degree.
equal reactance means no lag and max power transfer, and more capacitive reactance means current leads voltage.
impedance mismatch also means less than maximum power to load, and reflection to source [correct me f i'm wrong on this one]
I believe reflection is the key, to form some form of standing voltage waves. Standing waves are concidered a nuisance because they break down dielectrics.

Meyer's bifilar can be seen as a transmissionline: 2 parallel wires. The equivalent of a transmissionline is an [L]LC circuit like the vic. The wfc is the antenna on the line.

Just a different approach, give it a thought.

What if you tune into the self resonant frequency of a single choke? infinite impedance, so no current through the choke, and maximum power transfer to other coupled choke, strange phenomenon.

http://ocw.mit.edu/ans7870/8/8.02T/f04/visualizations/electrostatics/30-vdgdischarge/30-vdgdischarge320.html
interesing, explains why poynting flow flows inward


from 7:48:
the magnet can be thought of as the magnetic field in the core induced by the primary.
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 14, 2009, 19:01:30 pm
http://ocw.mit.edu/ans7870/8/8.02T/f04/visualizations/electrostatics/30-vdgdischarge/30-vdgdischarge320.html


What a cool animation, Dankie! Thanks..

Kind regards
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 14, 2009, 21:07:17 pm
i have to agree nice video dankie.. thanks for sharing... while looking at that it makes me think about whats the atoms are doing in the free space (movement) (expanding/ contracting)????  also the surface is round for that demonstration.. think of how in a tube cell they are flat and parallel so it will create flat flux likes in the cell?   beardon mention somthin about a mono fold occuring.. if you look at that pic that is at the begining of stans conference in swizerland you will see how it represents a mono fold... i also think this monofold is created by the the meeting of opposition in the cell.. the fold being the curent flow turning 90 degrees.. i think this mono fold is in turn once lagging in direction by 90 degrees must find a exit.. i think on its exit it develops a vortex and the gasses will produce in a vortex ribbon patter within a flat plate self that is observable..   anything fluid that has current movement , like water comming out a water hose hitting opposition such as a side walk will develop a 90 degree lag right? forming a puddle.. if the oposition isnt of at lest equal force then it will continue as forward current???
Title: Re: Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 15, 2009, 03:53:14 am
we know from the beginging that like charges deflect (push away from each other) and that unlike opposites attract.. alot of people cant understand how stan could get unlike charges to be present in the water.. cause like physics say, unlike attract and the electrons in the stainless neagtive plate should want to cross and wouldnt that cause current?

well heres the main key that has come to me from lots of study .. there is a logical reason why the charges in stans setup dont cross or leave the plates.. it has to do with the laws of attractions.. opposites attract right? so what happens if you are pulling electrons out of the positive choke and theres a choke wound right next to it of same volume (capacitance) and is connected to a ground? would that choke next to positive attract and manifest excess electrons to try to balance itself out? since doesnt balance have to do with relative points of charge in quantum space (and they are relativly close sitting next to each other on the core)? the actions of that transformer are dependent apon the changes happening in its space. that being said wouldnt the opposite charges be magneticaly stuck on the core??? and this being the main reason why stan says that you need more capacitance in the chokes then the cell. so it couples in the transfomer rather then the cell... leaving you with 2 potentials that have the possibility to be in water bath relativy close without dischage.. since it is more energy to try to satisfy its self (balance out) due to the resistance of water... if this dont make since then i dont know what does... 

now this leaves one outcome.. the charges being connected to the plates allows them to be able to potentialize to the same as the cores potential .. now here is probly a problem that could be occuring with some.. it is really important for the chokes to have the same length a.k.a volume (capacitance)

think if you were to have 2 100 gallon air tanks.. these 2 tanks are connected to each other with a air pump.. so the pump will pull from one and expel in the other... if the tanks are of equal volume that means your vacuum state (positive) is building evenly and in sync with the pressure (negative)
example: 1second on = -20 psi tank one and +20psi in tank 2------------ 3rd second -60 +60 and so on...

now if your volume is not exact lets say one tank is 50 gallons and the other is 100.. we will say the 50 gallon is the tank air is being pulled from and the 100 gallon is where its being expelled into... your results would be... 1second= -20 and +10 --------- 3rd second= -60 and+ 30..

as you can see it would be imposible to hit resonance without balance. since those same figures of air pressure relate with the transformer in a important way.. the law of attraction... you would never be able to hold a balance load... it would leak..

so what does that leave you with? the goal of using this product of voltage as a timed signal with dramatic amplification from 0-up and above 20kv.. .. the goal of the signal is to hit water and try to sync with the orbital electrons to throw it furthest from equilbrium.. by doing so it lowers its self producing electromagnetic strength (create from the orbital electrons orbit rate) instantly turning of its covalent bond..  so all in all its about balance and timing