Author Topic: Stan Meyer cracked by JNaudin!!!!  (Read 31064 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

hherby

  • Guest
Re: Stan Meyer cracked by JNaudin!!!!
« Reply #16 on: June 24, 2008, 23:17:09 pm »
It appears all of my previous posts were lost so I will reiterate my thoughts and observations about where the current is coming from to split the water.

When JNL is talking about resonance, it is not the resonance of the water itself (although the water does play the role of a dielectric). It is the resonance between the inductor(bifilar chokes) and the capacitor(a dielectric between two conductors in this case being water between 2 tubes with the cathode insulated to create a water capacitor). Note also by definition the chokes and the stepup transformer act as capacitors as well. A dielectric( magnet wire insulation and air) between conductors (the copper coil windings). Not only is the water charging, the inductors are acting like capacitors and charging to a higher voltage as well.

When in resonance, the secondary circuit resonates at double the frequency of the primary (It would look similar to full wave rectified ac). The rise of the positive primary pulse produces a voltage in the secondary. When the primary pulse drops, another pulse is generated. The diode forces the second pulse to be positive. At resonance this essencially maintains a steady positive potential on the secondary part of the circuit allowing the inductors and capacitor to charge. Once the pulse train is stopped, the inductors release their charge into the capacitor and then the capacitor discharges from a high potential to low potential. The diode and the chokes prevent current flow so the charge is dissipated within the water itself in the form of Amps (electron cascade?). This effect is corroborated by Tom Beardon when he speaks of a degenerate semiconductor circuit (quoted below). So it appears Meyer is using the principle of unipolar positive pulses without current to charge a capacitor to achive overunity.

Dr. Lindeman describes it as a catastrophic dielectric failure within the WFC, where voltage potential is changed to AMPS. I disagree with the "catastrophic dielectric failure" part but I agree that the potential is changed to AMPS. Dielectric failure would imply a dead short taking the shortest path through the dielectric from one conductor to the other. Instead, this appears to be a longitudinal flow of current through the water, not a direct flow between conductors.

Quote from an email by Tom Beardon to JNL.
Quote
Another way of looking at the switched degenerate semiconductor circuit is that one charges it with voltage only, completely statically, with no j(phi) current permitted during "excitation" or "potentialization". One then switches the voltage source away, having drawn only potential from it and not power, and the circuit then changes itself and dissipates this excess "static" energy in the load, by automatically converting itself into a normal dynamic conducting circuit as the electrons "relax" and move as current.



Now the two (supposedly) most successful devices are Meyer's cell and Boyce's cell. Although they both produce overunity results, they appear to work in opposite manners and do not produce the same quantities and quality of of gas. JNL stated at resonance a sinificant amount of gas was being generated but the bubbles were very fine. Boyce states the gas production in his setup is so vigorous it looks like it is at a furious boil.

Meyer prevents current flow and extracts electrons using a unipolar positive high voltage field and breaks the water into gas. But due to the shortage of electrons, the gasses are most likely predominately diatomic hydrogen and oxygen.  This may be why he uses laser injection to break the diatomic gases into monatomic gasses. They would not stay in monatomic form very long with the shortage of electrons. This is similar to the Hydrogen welding torch from the 1930's where H2 gas was passed thru a 300V AC arc between two tungsten electrodes to break it up into it's monatomic form where it would recombine on contact with the material being welded releasing a huge amount of heat in the process. It appears In both Meyer's and the Hydrogen welding torch setups, the gas has to be used immediately upon creation of monatomic form of the gas.

Conversely, Boyce allows current to flow and in addition applies a unipolar positive pulsed high voltage (but not as high as Meyer). Boyce has stated he believes the excess of electrons provided by the DC bias current, prevents the recombination of the gases from monatomic to diatomic form since the atoms have all of the electrons they need to be electrically neutral so they don't need to share any electrons with the other atoms. He commented that he had to switch from using SS tubing to plastic tubing between the cell and the LPG carb because he kept getting shocks whenever he touched the SS tubing. He attributed this to the excess of electrons present in the gas.

Now the part I like the most about Meyer's setup is the fact it does not need an electrolyte. That KOH or NaOH is nasty stuff to work with. If Meyer's cell blew up you would probably get wet, but if Boyce's popped, you would not olny get wet, you would be burned by the caustic electrolyte.

Now if you could separate the H2 from O2 coming out of Meyer's cell and pass the separated H2 thru an arc then it may be more viable. Once example of gas separation was in the Zach West Electrolyser design where he had a bubbler with a partial baffle and had electromagnets with steel cores on either side of the bubbler to pull the H2 away from the O2 as it passed thru the bubbler.

There are drawinga of Zach's bubbler/separator in Chapter 10 of Patrick Kelly's Practical Guide to Free-energy devices on pages 59, 62, 64, 70 and 71.

What would happen if the extracted diatomic gasses were passed thru a negative voltage field after it leaves Meyer's cell? Would they recombine into water or would they take on the extra electrons and separate into monatomic form?


Going back to Beardon's quote, if the pulse charged capacitor was switched to discharge into a regular electrolysys cell with an electrolyte, this would inherently be overunity electrolysys and you could also generate the H2 and O2 separately above their respective electrodes. If you charge the capacitors to high voltage, the discharge could be switched into a primary winding of a stepdown transformer amplifying the current and keeping the voltage low around 1.5V for a single large cell.

Combining the good parts of the different systems may work nicely.


Comments?

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Jr. member
  • *
  • Posts: 31
Re: Stan Meyer cracked by JNaudin!!!!
« Reply #17 on: June 24, 2008, 23:53:59 pm »
What the guy is saying is he cracked water with little or hardly any amps at all with high voltage, he says the gas does not look like much but when you measure its output for some reason its rediculusly high!

Steve is emailing him, i ask for him to find his production, and transformer type. The information on that page has been backed up and saved and if the guy seems to be legit it will be tested, "not by me", i have to much on my hands right now, and i dont have the money to test every device someone claims to be overunity.

My point of  view is if You, or That Guy made water resonate with high voltage and low amps then this is something stan didn't do, therfor your the one that deserves the pat on the back. But this is just my point of view. I have tested this technology Long enough to understand stan LOVED his amp flow to his cell, matter of fact he could get more amps to the cell than we can, how he does it? im still working on it. But high volts low amps, you gots to prove me wrong, i say it cant be done, and i say stan didn't do this but his way of distraction! Anyways, you guys have the rest of your life to prove me wrong with using high voltage low amps to crack water, if you succeed i wouldn't be suprised.

I will end this post by saying, Test Report of Evaulation Page 60... 12.5 Volts 40 Amps 500 Watts 7 liters a Min. Now thats 4.4 amps per tube, 55 watts per tube.

Can you make 1 tube consume 4.4 amps with olmost an 8th inch gap?
How was that high volts low amps?



After some extensive testing I agree with hydrocars on this one.  Stan had 9 tubes 18 inches long perhaps that was why he was drawing 40 amps. Stevie has super long tubes.

Stevie Can you let us know:

  • How many tubes you had in your super tall cell?

     what was the maximum amps you got your cell to draw regardless of voltage?

    What was the maximum amp draw at 12 volts?

  • I dont buy Naudins replication. The clip is way too short and sped up at least 60% of its original speed. Please pay close attention to the way the small bubbles form and rise and you will clearly see the video is sped up.

    I get gas like naudins if i use a PWM at 12 volts 0.8 amps distilled water however my inner tubes are not coated.

    If this is a major breakthrough then it has way too little information for anyone to test or verify.

    I vote that presumptous link  stanley meyers work cracked be taken down until this replication is confirmed by the public at large.

    Perhaps possible stanley meyer crack will be appropriate instead of the line used now.

    jared

    • Guest
    Re: Stan Meyer cracked by JNaudin!!!!
    « Reply #18 on: June 25, 2008, 01:49:31 am »
    i second the vote to change the presumptious name of this post

    i also vote for me to stop wasting my time reading all this extremely technical stuff and wasting all of the jedi councils time with my silly inquiries and comments

    its just too deep for dummies like me, i think you guys would benefit greatly from using  this forum as astepping stone to an "inner circle" of those in the know because honestly folks like myself are just wasting server space......and youre time

    good luck on the work and i will keep an eye on you all for a feasible buld that i can complete myself

    the object that we should all keep in mind is liberation from the oppression of oil, global liberation that is

    Offline Login to see usernames

    • Jr. member
    • *
    • Posts: 12
    Re: Stan Meyer cracked by JNaudin!!!!
    « Reply #19 on: June 25, 2008, 02:10:35 am »
     Is this for real,  is the work for wfc finished?

    Offline Login to see usernames

    • Sr. member
    • ***
    • Posts: 368
    • Yes I got Jolted,
    Re: Stan Meyer cracked by JNaudin!!!!
    « Reply #20 on: June 25, 2008, 02:19:29 am »
    Actually I think it is just getting started... this is the 1st time I saw breaking water with isolated tube...


    creationist70

    • Guest
    Re: Stan Meyer cracked by JNaudin!!!!
    « Reply #21 on: June 25, 2008, 04:27:38 am »
    h2o power,

     i am pretty much in line with u.high voltage.i tried the coated cathode about two months ago. there is some validity to it.if u check your voltage at the wfc while it is running, u will see that there is a lot less voltage drop as compared to an uncoated cathode, even if the uncoated cat. is in distilled water! this does mean the cell can step up voltage instead of shorting to the anode.

    stan slipped up in one of his conferences, he mentioned the vale of voltage he was putting into the CHOKES let alone the wfc. he mentioned his toroidal transformer was putting out 20,000 volts!!

    my dad is a retired electrician  and is helping me out with this thing. he, as per my advice, wrapped a plastic tube with mag. wire as to simulate the coated cathode. than used a microwave transformer with the pwm and a relay to charge up the cell. of course he also used the chokes and diodes as per d-14 or stan. he just wanted to see if higher voltage would work. he got 220 volts at the cell with it running! the cell really didn't zap too much voltage. this is the kicker, he said the cell produced at least half as much hho as if he ran two ss tubes strait off the battery!! remember, this is with the inner cathode completely insulated!! and also technically a large coil...hmmm.

    imagine 20,000 volts, just a thought. if the cathode is insulated, the wfc wouldn't zap the voltage no matter what type of water u use! ya think maybe stan insulated his cathodes?? i noticed as i doubled my secondary windings on my toroid, the production on the INSULATED cathode set also seemed to double.

    some said that stan was cautious of people looking close at his wfc....what do ya think?

    i am wright on board with your thinking, don't get discouraged, keep sending your info. something will happen we ALL will get it .some way or another!!


    hydro

    • Guest
    Re: Stan Meyer cracked by JNaudin!!!!
    « Reply #22 on: June 25, 2008, 07:54:48 am »
    hrmmm,,,, anyone up for crayons and a barney video?

    Online Login to see usernames

    • Administrator
    • Hero member
    • ****
    • Posts: 4440
      • water structure and science
    Re: Stan Meyer cracked by JNaudin!!!!
    « Reply #23 on: June 25, 2008, 15:12:26 pm »
    What the guy is saying is he cracked water with little or hardly any amps at all with high voltage, he says the gas does not look like much but when you measure its output for some reason its rediculusly high!

    Steve is emailing him, i ask for him to find his production, and transformer type. The information on that page has been backed up and saved and if the guy seems to be legit it will be tested, "not by me", i have to much on my hands right now, and i dont have the money to test every device someone claims to be overunity.

    My point of  view is if You, or That Guy made water resonate with high voltage and low amps then this is something stan didn't do, therfor your the one that deserves the pat on the back. But this is just my point of view. I have tested this technology Long enough to understand stan LOVED his amp flow to his cell, matter of fact he could get more amps to the cell than we can, how he does it? im still working on it. But high volts low amps, you gots to prove me wrong, i say it cant be done, and i say stan didn't do this but his way of distraction! Anyways, you guys have the rest of your life to prove me wrong with using high voltage low amps to crack water, if you succeed i wouldn't be suprised.

    I will end this post by saying, Test Report of Evaulation Page 60... 12.5 Volts 40 Amps 500 Watts 7 liters a Min. Now thats 4.4 amps per tube, 55 watts per tube.

    Can you make 1 tube consume 4.4 amps with olmost an 8th inch gap?
    How was that high volts low amps?



    After some extensive testing I agree with hydrocars on this one.  Stan had 9 tubes 18 inches long perhaps that was why he was drawing 40 amps. Stevie has super long tubes.

    Stevie Can you let us know:

  • How many tubes you had in your super tall cell?

     what was the maximum amps you got your cell to draw regardless of voltage?

    What was the maximum amp draw at 12 volts?



  • Katz:

    I have 10 tubes of 24 inches in my wfc.
    It is pulling 20 amps by 12V with tapwater
    My gap is 2mm
    The totall amount of amps this cell can pull is depending on voltage. Higher volts, mean higher amps.
    For sure there is a limit to that, but cannot say how high that is..

    br
    Steve