Recent Posts

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 »
61
The basics / Re: The fallacy of modern EM
« Last post by Login to see usernames on October 07, 2021, 18:25:36 pm »
you can't get away from the lorrentz law

this is easily explained by the induction forces because the regular lorrentz force and inductive lorrentz force cancel each other out inside the receiver and the  regular lorrentz forces between the antenna and receiver give the resultant forces
62
The basics / Re: The fallacy of modern EM
« Last post by Login to see usernames on October 07, 2021, 15:06:33 pm »
This modified lorrentz equation is what you wanna use

F= q v' x B + B' x q' v

not the maxwell equations because they are fancy mathematical tricks to get the same results with hiding the true mechanism behind these phenomena

div E = charge density

div B = 0  the same magnetic flux that goes out goes in

curl E = change of the enclosed magnetic flux density ONLY APPLIES FOR SELECT SITUATIONS

curl B =  conductor current density + change in the enclosed electric flux field ONLY APPLIES FOR SELECT SITUATIONS

and you use these last ones with relativity transformations to get one from the other

the big problem is with using closed integrals for the enclosed fields!! there is no need to use enclosed loops, it's the biggest cause for every paradox, it's just that for the cases of enclosed loops the force is much greater in everyday applications so these equations are good as approximations and should not be used as bread and butter, just because the force is small with the equipment we use today doesn't mean we should still be using these 100 year old equations , when you use high enough energy these forces are measurable and change the results, you can never cancel a magnetic field you only cancel the force you measure!! how do you think you can get this hidden force? It's simple you just use canceling magnetic fields! How do you make this force great? Simple you use high energy sparks! Now you get the force the empirical EM laws have in them, the new force vector component is not the same as the traditional force vectors!!!


For the simple linear conductor case the hidden force can still be measured because the force components don't go out of whack , in the loop conductor the case is different the hidden force cannot be measured if the B fields don't cancel.

Paradoxes paradoxes paradoxes no one cares.

in essence there are 3 forces!! the regular lorrentz force, the hidden lorrentz force and inductive lorrentz force !!

F= q * v' x B + B' x q' * v +  q *(sqrt(a/r)) x B(sqrt(a/r) ) all different vector components
63
The basics / The fallacy of modern EM
« Last post by Login to see usernames on October 06, 2021, 20:58:58 pm »
Hello people, I am writing to inform you about the equations for the force of the electric and magnetic fields maxwell used= these  are wrong or at least right for select situations but fail with others, this is NOT A UNIVERSAL LAW and should not be taught as such in schools.  Both the lorrentz and coulomb law are incomplete!!! This is the reason there are dozens of paradoxes which can't be solved! I can get the same EM equations without using fancy notations like maxwell, just differentiation of first order DE.

Here they produce an empirical law but it's still not simple enough!

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265262978_On_Electrodynamics_of_Uniform_Moving_Charges

Even in the orthodox cases the EM equations fall apart when the particle which makes the radiation is near the speed of light!!!!  Complete bollocks !! I have a strict condition that the particles are not near the speed of light in order to make accurate approximations and get the maxwell equations with my method which used the more complex equations. Maxwell used the incomplete equations and never made any mention of the speed of the radiative particles because there's no way to figure it out with incomplete equations. How do the EM equations change for speeds near c? I've no idea, never bothered with them. The only way you're ever gonna get speeds near c is with high-energy sparks!
64
fastimports3 / Re: Looking for the right photocatalytic combination to extract electrons
« Last post by Login to see usernames on October 06, 2021, 19:53:10 pm »
The EZ water term is not real per se, I make surfaces that always hold a hydration layer using polymers with polyethylene glycol , these are anti microbial surfaces, they always hold a more ordered hydration water layer near the surface than the rest of the water so there is an energy penalty for disturbing this structure, you don't make this layer by just throwing PEG everywhere but you space out the PEG on the polymer for water to break through, I really don't know if this would change how electrolysis works, in electrolysis there's always a Helmholtz layer which is full of ions, you may get different voltage for the cell but the energy efficiency cannot reach overunity. Tuning the hydrophilicity e.x. PEG and the hydrogen affinity e.x. TiO2 of the electrode surface will change the efficiency of electrolysis for better or worse but then again it won't reach overunity.

Using noble metals to boost hydrogen production means you have to keep out all CO2 out so even when feeding water you need to CO2 scrub it!!! Its not practical.
Using aluminum would sacrifice the metal and produce hydrogen, it has been proposed for running fuel cells and batteries but it's not practical.
The last trend is using ammonia as fuel which is again not practical because its too dangerous.

What has been tried and tested is running cars on an alcohol/water mixture, there's the possibility meyer didn't use only hydrogen! He may have added sugar and a fungus to make alcohol or something else, there are a lot of things you can use as a primary fuel and use the water as an expansive agent to match the power of gasoline. The light could also be used to activate the fungus for alcohol production, meyer may have had a super strain of fungi , maybe he was a brewer who knows. :P
65
fastimports3 / Re: Looking for the right photocatalytic combination to extract electrons
« Last post by Login to see usernames on October 05, 2021, 07:07:49 am »
Hi Geon
The second law is followed as if it were written in stone. It stops people from questioning things that don’t fit in the ridged structure of the rule.

For fun check out Ilya Prigogine
What is Prigogine theorem?
a theorem of the thermodynamics of nonequilibrium processes according to which the minimum level of production of entropy in a system, under conditions preventing the attainment of the equilibrium state, corresponds to the steady state of that system.

I’m not sure Stan’s claims are valid myself. However I look through his stuff wondering if he hasn’t hidden things in plain sight. Or that he hasn’t laid out an idea of how the total system works throughout his patents. Are the patents scrambled possibly intertwined.

The goal is not hydrogen as we think of it from electrolysis. It is a 4th state of matter plasma or different isomeric configuration.
Possibly We are looking for a strange compound arrangement. Intently chatted with Cynthia Kolb Whitney. I have posted from her publication several times here On the Several Nanostructures of Water. She referred me to Jerry Pollack and EZ water.

Structured water is also known as hexagonal water or EZ (exclusion zone) water, forming H3O2 rather than H2O. It naturally arranges its hydrogen and oxygen molecules into repeating and ordered geometric crystal-like formations.

Developed on a hydrophilic (water-loving) surface, EZ water forms when it is exposed to heat and light including infrared light. It forms a honeycombed lattice-like appearance and becomes more viscous, dense and alkaline than regular H2O.

There’s a possibility that what I’m trying to do is different then what Stan did. I have observed on several occasions a Stanley cell produces a fog. Fog produced by the WFC resembles the water coming from the cold fogger.The the properties of the water have been altered.

 I’m looking at the photocatalyst method only for stripping the electrons from the cold fog. I want to build a gas processor on top of the cold fog system.
66
fastimports3 / Re: Looking for the right photocatalytic combination to extract electrons
« Last post by Login to see usernames on October 04, 2021, 16:42:42 pm »
for all I know meyer could have been mistaken about his claims

the questions is how to create hydrogen right?
Water can have many isoforms, because the angle between the two hydrogens can change and stays like this for a while they say it  has a memory effect, it's lattice order changes but the main uses for this effect is that it alters the wetting properties of water so water changes it's surface energy, this is the ability of materials to repel each other, these characteristics don't really change the energy required to do electrolysis but the surface energy may alter the voltage of a cell because the Helmholtz layer which is a thin layer of ions near the electrodes changes thickness, but again we're talking about faraday electrolysis with the faraday law of electrolysis , its taught in undergraduate thermodynamics lesson , you cant just electrolyze water and get net energy gain, much of it must be turned to heat.

if you want to use photocatalyst then you must make nanocatalyst by reducing metal salts preferably in the presence of something conductive like graphite or polyaniline as a capping agent so the resistive loss will be low, nanocatalyst have almost 200% gains in efficiency compared to regular catalysts

I've used TiO2 in non aqueous solutions and it actually adorbs a lot of hydrogen, it also adorbs water vapor but last time I checked the reduction potential is not high enough for water electrolysis, even though 1.2v may do you usually need 1.8v for it so you definitely need to custom make titanium oxides for photocatalysis of water

it means you replace electrolysis with photocatalysis where photons get turned into electrons and directly transferred to water so you can combine the two, I mean the UV from sparks may get turned into excitation energy for a photocatalyst but the main thermodynamic law will still apply turning most electricity to heat, you have spark turned into heat and light, electrons getting turned into heat in electrolysis and light getting converted back into electricity with the photocatalyst but you're producing heat in both methods so the net gain is negative

let's say meyer was turning spark directly into excitation energy for the photocatalyst which hasn't been done before, this means no actual electrolysis is being done and it's all done by the photocatalyst but why not just use a UV lamp with all it's losses to excite the photocatalyst to make the exact same lossy mechanism as electrolysis?

creating sparks means you have to spend energy in electron collisions so it's not a waste free method of creating photons!

water must be one of the most stable molecules in the universe and you're trying to break it apart, why not use alcohol with water as fuel? alcohol can be easily made by brewing sugar and the cost of making yourself is low, although its still illegal to run unregistered fuels
67
fastimports3 / Re: Looking for the right photocatalytic combination to extract electrons
« Last post by Login to see usernames on October 04, 2021, 12:45:42 pm »
Yes, i know that drawing very well.
It is as far as i can remember, a part of the alternator setup and more of his early work.
Later he explained in a video that he was not using a resistive element anymore, but only coils / chokes / vic, etc etc

68
fastimports3 / Re: Looking for the right photocatalytic combination to extract electrons
« Last post by Login to see usernames on October 04, 2021, 04:40:35 am »
It is this line from the patent number listed below that Stan leaves out a huge piece of info. The coating he mentions. Ceramics are often mixed with binders and the such.

“To alter the resistive value of the electron inhibitor 70/74, the resistive material 72 comprising a mixture with a binder is altered in the percentage of resistive material to binder. “


Taking from U.S. patent number 4,798,661

The electron leakage resistor will again raise the upper limit of 8.5 volts amplitude before breakdown as shown at L-5 of FIG. 8. In the generation of the hydrogen and oxygen gasses to an infinite limit, as yet not fully appreciated, the upper level of amplitude of the voltage is removed with the utilization of the electron inhibitor of FIG. 7.

In this embodiment of the current inhibitor connected to the inner plate having the negative voltage applied thereto, comprises a stainless steel sandwich 70/74 with a resistive material therebetween. The stainless steel is a poor conductive material and hence will restrict to some extent the electron flow. Other poor conductive material may be utilized in lieu of the stainless steel. The electron inhibitor 70/74 is connected in the same manner as resistor 60--between the inner plate having the negative potential connected to it and ground.

The resistive value of the electron inhibitor 70/74 is chosen empirically to a closest value, thereafter the total value of the resistance is fine tuned by the resistor 75 connected serially between the inner plate and ground.

To alter the resistive value of the electron inhibitor 70/74, the resistive material 72 comprising a mixture with a binder is altered in the percentage of resistive material to binder.

With reference to FIGS. 1 and 8, the pulse d.c. voltage of a repetitive frequency and the duty cycle pulses, together with the serially connected plate exciter techniques in the sequence for limiting the electron leakage is in relation to the positive exciter outer plate. The current inhibitor resistor 60 and the current inhibitor resistor 70/74 are in the negative voltage line connected to the inner plate.
69
fastimports3 / Re: Looking for the right photocatalytic combination to extract electrons
« Last post by Login to see usernames on October 03, 2021, 19:54:17 pm »
Hi Geon
  Yes everything you say about photocatalyst is correct they have been around for decades. Stan talks about a resistive coating in one of his patents. He does not go into what the coating is. Only that it is resistive. In parts of his manual Stan shows the interaction of photon energy and the water. The gas processor uses lights to operate. It appears Stan has left something out of the obvious but has hinted through illustrations and his patent dealing with resistive coating with a blank to be filled. The only thing that makes sense is a photocatalyst. Many people much like Ravi have tried different things to build up on the cells over time. And I’m not sure it was used on cells in water bath at all. However the gas processor has all the makings of a photocatalytic device that except the coating used. Adding ceramic glazes to the different photocatalyst also creates restrictive coating that should allow one to use high voltage with limited amp flow, like an electron gun in a old tv.
70
fastimports3 / Re: Looking for the right photocatalytic combination to extract electrons
« Last post by Login to see usernames on October 03, 2021, 16:44:54 pm »
so what? photocatalyst are known for decades even rust can be used as a photocatalyst but you have to use light not electricity to activate the photocatalyst

Oxides of titanium can adsorb a lot of hydrogen on their surface so for any reaction that evolves hydrogen  it cause the hydrogen evolution to be much greater, especially titanium with noble metals such as palladium and platinum.

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 »