Ionizationx: a clean environment is a human right!

Stanley Meyer => Stan Meyers system 1 => Topic started by: Dankie on January 20, 2010, 02:09:31 am

Title: EEC ... Not so complicated ?
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 20, 2010, 02:09:31 am
http://www.doctorkoontz.com/Scalar_Physics/Stan_Meyer/Patents/70_Thermal_Energy_From_Gases/Fig_10.JPG

Did anybody ever think of using a p-type mosfet for this ? Lets say a few nanoseconds before the gating off time , the gate off time , not the off time between pulses ? could easily be done ...

http://www.doctorkoontz.com/Scalar_Physics/Stan_Meyer/Patents/70_Thermal_Energy_From_Gases/Fig_10.JPG

How could we simply use the EEC with simple semidonductor and proper timing ?

The electrons are negative right ? We want to pull out the negative electrons to stop the gas from reforming quickly after the hv ionization tickling etc...
Title: Re: EEC ... Not so complicated ?
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 20, 2010, 02:41:14 am
The question I always asked myself was how this worked really , it seems to me like an open circuit ?...

If I connect the + from the battery to ground ( real earth ground ) , nothing happnes , no energy flows ... No lightbulb lights ...

What you guys think ?
Title: Re: EEC ... Not so complicated ?
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 20, 2010, 05:04:18 am
None of this stuff is posible unless we get the Meyer effect first.Get that figured out first,than the rest of this stuff will fall into place.Other wise were just wasteing time.It won't work without high voltage across the tubes.
Don
Title: Re: EEC ... Not so complicated ?
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 20, 2010, 06:21:06 am
I Think there should be a diode in parallel with the fuel cell...  ;D

Title: Re: EEC ... Not so complicated ?
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 20, 2010, 15:13:51 pm
I Think there should be a diode in parallel with the fuel cell...  ;D

The EEC is exactly related to Meyers don , I dont understand your point .

So that diode mean high voltage across the tubes warp , I guess it does ?

Anyways I am not messing around with this old Stan stuff .

I am moving on with my new Stephen Meyers driver unit I should be getting in 2 weeks . Stephen seemed to be saying that Stan's design were not researched enough ... Perhaps it was based on Stan's intuition and not fully researched as to what was causing the extra production . As stated by Stephen that even he still didnt know what exactly was going on with Stan's cell .

No positive news from Hardkrome yet regarding the VIC .

Don , why should we figure out anything ? Test that VIC and show that it can work .
Title: Re: EEC ... Not so complicated ?
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 20, 2010, 19:28:13 pm
Here is something that will time everything perfectly .

No overlap , a few nano seconds before the HV stops , the static pull begins .

Give it a try . For mosfet driver theres alot out there , very simple to operate if you consult any datasheet , all the instructions are there for even complete noobs to operate . But you must keep leads very short and wide . No more than an inch between mosfet driver and mosfet and large wire , I use very wide planes for mosfet on my pcb .

This circuit is on my pcb , you can have auto-gating with either  divide by 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 on a rotary switch or divide all those by either 2 or 4 once more .

So a maximum of divide by 40 spacing . For asymetrical gate/pulse ratios you must use manual jolt gating.

Yes I am the #1 LOL .

Low-side mosfet = N Channel mosfet

High-side mosfet = P Channel mosfet

All of these logic gates are different gates , no exeption , only their numbers are the same because I copy pasted , dont let that confuse you . Wired as is



Title: Re: Difference between N-channel and P channel mosfet
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 21, 2010, 02:52:38 am
http://www.sullivan-county.com/ele/transistor_drivers.htm

So there is a difference between the two , a difference I dont fully understand the point of but still ...

Is this the EEC ? It seems to me like Stan was sourcing the current , into an undefined load/ground/electrons from gas .Still do not understand how this makes a ground for current to flow but what do I know about ionics right ? Maybe really weak and distant electrons will flow to the positive ?? Then once they make their way from the cavity to the lightbulb ( electrons travel from from - to + , they are - ) they are trapped there , because of diode ?

Multiple LEDS are also on while the positive pull is on .


http://media.photobucket.com/image/stanley%20meyers%20eec/h20power/Resonant2BGas2Bprocessor2BLED2Bdriv.jpg


Negative electron tries to go to positive EEC circuit...
Title: Re: EEC ... Not so complicated ?
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 21, 2010, 07:04:09 am
The Videos I posted is still on YOUTUBE.

The Kvolts read across the tubes apprears to be Garbled, But its there. I suggest Tinkering with an HV diode mounted in parallel with the cell, So that the correct voltage can Clearly be read across the cell.

This would mean the cell would not be subjected to a double pulse, But Hv applied across. Whoevers following this, I do not have the time to play with any of this. I cant even so much as look at an single tube cell. Take the videos, imagine a diode in parallel with the cell,, See what comes to you.

Good luck, You can manage something, Whoever you are.
Title: Re: EEC ... Not so complicated ?
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 21, 2010, 16:27:37 pm
Warp,if your still looking for someone else to test out your chokes,I'll try it on my setup.I'll PM you with my address.Just give me some specs on how to try it.My frequency generator can go to 30 khz,with a 50% duty cycle,with or without a fixed 50% gating.
Don