Thanks for your reply web, just some small things to bring to light,

Firstly, the pulse doubler, I believe, is how his transformer is connected, by having the 3 secondaries, you get your first pulse from the magnetic coupling of the transformer, then as the first secondary's magnetic field collapses this causes the other secondaries to hold their magnetic fields, as the current is still flowing. Once the field has collapsed there is nothing else forcing current flow, so your other fields collapse (second pulse).

As for your theories on the diode, I am sure that there is not a lot that a diode can do except block the flow of current. Therefore i would say that it is used to hold charge on the positive plate. FYI, it has been known to happen that when i diode fails it can result as a resistor on the line rather than a diode. This would allow the current to flow in both directions but with a non determined resistance.

Some more things to understand about this method is that the amount of resistance in your cell has no bearing on your resonant frequency and thus is not part of my initial equation, the fluctuation in the capacitance of the test cell is more my main concern. I am hoping that as the circuit moves in and out of resonance that the magnetic field strength will fluctuate in strength. This will mean that i could use the strength of the magnetic field to "tune" the circuit as it produces gas.

As i said above the resistance of the cell does not effect the resonant frequency, what it does effect is the amp consumption of the circuit. This is where your efficiency calculations can come into it.

Anyone know the resistance of water? We know that the more electrolyte there is the lower its resistance, this also means the lower the voltage that the circuit will ascertain before reaction. So if the resistance of your cell is really high due to the lack of "impurities" (electrolyte) you will need a lot of "watts" to penetrate, that is why brute force electrolysis is so in-efficient. An RC circuit at resonance works like a reciprocating "tank circuit". This means that minus your loses through overcome resistance, each cycle doubles your voltage potential with no diminishing returns on your amps (minus the "consumed" amps through the resistance of your circuit). Now resistance is calculated as R=V/A (R is Resistance, V is Voltage and I is Ampere), so as you increase voltage the required amps is reduced. This works 2 fold, the resistance of your components losses are reduced as there is more volts in the circuit therefore less amps required (by required i am referring to what is commonly called "consumed"), Now back to the water, as you increase voltage your resistance drops, so the resistance in water drops. This drop in resistance continues in each cycle until all of the amps that have been accumulated by the circuit are used. This is your gas production.

Now gas production at 12v 1500ma is not a lot, but gas production at Xv @ 1500ma is quite considerable. Now why did i use "X" in the above? X represents the voltage requirement for 99% of the amps to pass through the water in the cycle time of the circuit. the remaining 1% (and arbitrary number) is to maintain the voltage level in the process. If all of the amps are allowed to pass through the cell the voltage level will drop and you will need to bring it up again.

Now if this is what Stan was doing, his disclosed work is over 10 steps ahead of me in increasing its efficiency. But I, like everyone else, don't know and understand his work to the point of replication successfully. So i have taken a different line. I have looked and read his patents, gone through all of his work i could find and isolated what i think is the "core" method used. Now i am testing my idea. All my notes and "theories" on this i am posting here for reference and to log it in for everyone to see.