### Author Topic: Results from some tests...  (Read 49075 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

• 50+
• Posts: 58
##### Re: Results from some tests...
« Reply #104 on: July 11, 2009, 14:10:39 pm »
Steve,

How does a  dielectric constant of 80 equate to a  resistance  of 80 ohms ?

I don't think it works like that .   Does  air have a resistance of only 1 ohm ?

• Member
• Posts: 136
##### Re: Results from some tests...
« Reply #105 on: July 11, 2009, 14:31:42 pm »
See here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dielectric_constant

seems to be a dimensionless constant and related to capacitance and static electricity

• Sr. member
• Posts: 387
##### Re: Results from some tests...
« Reply #106 on: July 11, 2009, 14:33:03 pm »
Steve,

How does a  dielectric constant of 80 equate to a  resistance  of 80 ohms ?

I don't think it works like that .   Does  air have a resistance of only 1 ohm ?

It doesnt :] but it does relate to the reactive resistance.
have seen meyer intermixing leakage resistance and dielectric constant.
now, what is the specific ohmic resistance of water? much higher than 80ohm-cm, more in the range of 1k-1M ohm-cm [divide by the distance to get the resistance]

• Hero member
• Posts: 4538
##### Re: Results from some tests...
« Reply #107 on: July 11, 2009, 16:02:03 pm »
Hi,

Well, let me explain it a better way.

Although water is a polar molecule, its hydrogen-bonded network tends to oppose this alignment. The degree to which a substance does this is called its dielectric constant (permittivity). Because water possesses a hydrogen bonded network that transmits polarity shifts extensively through rapid and linked collective changes in the orientation of its hydrogen bonds, it has a high dielectric constant.

That way, it takes some time before the water molecules are aligned and electrons can flow from one to the other electrodes, in our case.

In Stans case, you can read that he didnt want electrons to travel thru the water.
Thats the reason why he writes in his memo that he wanted to use water as part of the total resistance part of his setup.

I maybe have said it a little cru, but i think you all understand that the real resistance is depening on many parameters. I have seen resistances between the 0.1ohm till 100 ohm in my tests.

Steve

• 50+
• Posts: 58
##### Re: Results from some tests...
« Reply #108 on: July 11, 2009, 16:32:36 pm »
Steve,

How does a  dielectric constant of 80 equate to a  resistance  of 80 ohms ?

I don't think it works like that .   Does  air have a resistance of only 1 ohm ?

It doesnt :] but it does relate to the reactive resistance.
have seen meyer intermixing leakage resistance and dielectric constant.
now, what is the specific ohmic resistance of water? much higher than 80ohm-cm, more in the range of 1k-1M ohm-cm [divide by the distance to get the resistance]

Aren't  these number specific to theoretically pure water?

When we are using "natural water" as Meyer calls it,  doesnt everything change?    Natural Water is not really  just H20.   It is a mixture of all kinds of stuff .... H20,  disolved minerals,  disolved gases,  chlorine, etc,  all of which render any pure water formulas  less than accurate, if not completely useless.

For example when I model the VIC circuit in SPICE,  I can get  primary resonance and resonance at hormonics,  and huge voltage gains with using a standard Capactior model ( Very high parallel resistance).   However as soon as  parallel resistance is reduced to say, 100 ohms  it all goes to crap.   In other words, the high conductivity as a result of the low resistance  of the "natural  water kills the resonance and any voltage gains.

Same thing with my system.  I can get huge voltages from the VIC transformer  at "resonance"  but very little voltage potential across the cell.
It seems the "resonance"  is more related to the inductance and distrubited capacitances of  the transformer and chokes than to the "water capacitor" .   The water capacitor appears to act only as a low resistance and not as a capacitor at all.

• Hero member
• Posts: 1019
##### Re: Results from some tests...
« Reply #109 on: July 11, 2009, 17:15:38 pm »
now this thread has some good questions and perspectives..

"""Meyer uses the term "physical force equal in frequency".  I take this to mean the motion/inertia  of the water molecule and not the pulsed DC, as that would be an electrical force. Meyer goes on to say that coaxial tubes work in the same manner as the spherical design."""""

i would like to repeat this quote once more by stan..
" 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?"

i think i see whats happening...  tell me what you think of these perspectives...

the resistance of water and or any other dielectric of resistance determinds the speed of the wave..
the more contaminates means more less resistive paths for energy transfer..
so would higher resistance (80 dielectric value of water) be the lowest freq used for generation, while with more contaminates the speed of singal transfer across resistant gap increases, resulting with higher freq??

the way voltage is interacting with water is atomically meaning having an effect on water molecule individually.. since they share the same relative quantum space they appear to the eye to be affected as a whole and they are to a extent.. when somthing is effected with physical (matter hitting matter) as a whole,  like your hand hitting the water( you are hitting the with 2 wholes your hand and the water... this force effects the whole but its effects are proton verse proton deflection ...voltage force is on matter and not a current through the eather.. it effects both protons and electrons rather then the the proton verse proton of direct physical force (like the water and hand)....   voltage is more efficient for vibrating/ pumping the water into higher states of vibration..

so what happens if we allow both to happen? the physical force and the voltage force???

in order to get the cell to reach max potential in both physical proton verse proton (hand hitting water)
and the pulsing voltage potential.. wouldnt your freq of voltage pulse and gain of amplitude match the wave of the tubes?

to match them would give dual resonance? vibrations from 2 demensions..  voltage (which is a atomic physical force), and matter hitting matter = physical..  if they hit in tune voltage can encourage the tubes to vibrate giving you the both in the water.. the vibration will oscillate the protons and electrons more effective i think.. maybe just the proton mass..

i see the tubes or plates having a attraction during any potentializing on time, while on off time the plates will be attracted by the charge inducted and will be steped up in pulse.. during of time they appear neutral 0 since there is a balance and the plates take out there magnetic attaction on the closes matter (the water)  the positive plate will not take on electrons because the transformer will not allow it to happen.. it itself is also balanced having the same charged induced and magneticaly stuck on its core...

this patent explains what stans transformer is doing to the T.   nikola tesla explains the bifilar coils well and how they create false currents

• 50+
• Posts: 58
##### Re: Results from some tests...
« Reply #110 on: July 11, 2009, 17:47:23 pm »
Quote
i would like to repeat this quote once more by stan..
" 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?"

Outlaw,

Please provide a reference for this quote.

• Sr. member
• Posts: 387
##### Re: Results from some tests...
« Reply #111 on: July 11, 2009, 17:53:55 pm »
Quote
When we are using "natural water" as Meyer calls it,  doesnt everything change?
these are the specific resistances, 1000ohm-cm at 1mm makes 100 ohm, like stevie found.
But yes, I guess these numbers are for quite pure water.
found em here  http://aqua-sol.com/water_technology.html

Vic must work in a dead short condition, can we compare it to, or do we must approach it as the hairpin circuit, in which a 0v node exists in the middle of the bar at dead short condition?
Is 0V in fig 8-10 such a node?

Above:
I think he said that in the colorado lecture.

Hmm, when approaching the coils as capactitors [at hf they become capacitive], we have a circuit similar to tesla hairpin, but without a gap to discharge em, no need to perhaps?

If a wfc is connected on a hairpin circuit  close to the caps for HV, no disassociation appeared, but what happens when the freq is adjusted to a freq corresponding to the wfc?
hairpin circuit is a proven HV at dead short device.

and once again standing wave comes to my mind
which is possible if the spikes are seen as ghz pulses: 3e9 m/s /  100ghz = 3 cm wavelength, hmm 100 ghz  I doubt it.

« Last Edit: July 11, 2009, 19:04:53 pm by Alan »