Does anyone know what the reaction is , when theres no electrolyte?

[Login to see usernames]

good question.. the answer is yes ... if you could take for example 2 protons out of oxygen and more 2 neutrons you would get two hydrogen atoms or even a helium atom... and would end up with nitrogen

actually after 11 minutes the neutrons decay into another two hydrogen atom with its own electron each...

this were only examples..

[Login to see usernames]

The hydrogen will always go to form the hydrogen molecule but the oxygen will not. Once the oxygen has depleted the oxygen molecules from which to join with and create ozone it will remain as a monatomic gas atom for a while. The reason why these monatomic oxygen gas atoms don't come together all that quickly is they all have the same charge and like charges repel, correct?

A long time ago this got me to thinking about just what was creating all of this excess energy and it dawned on me that the oxygen atom is responsible for this in Meyer's technology as it has far more electrons to lose and Meyer is actually targeting them to take away up to 4-5 electrons away from the oxygen atoms prior to using them for the creation of the water molecules by being spark ignited in the presence of hydrogen.

Once the reaction is started these two atoms must form the water molecules but they can't as the oxygen atom is missing electrons. Meyer called this extended time prolonging the formation of the water molecules as once the reaction was started these atoms have to come up with the missing electrons from the zero point. It is here where all of the excess energy comes from as E=MC2 tells us the energy given off for the creation of these missing electrons as the electrons have mass.

Give this some thought...

Shalom,
TGS

[Login to see usernames]

Checking the literature to see what is already known in a given field is part of the Scientific Method.  doobie was using the Scientific Method when he found the information about lightning splitting water, as evidenced by the red component of the glowing discharge.  Now that Ed Mitchel has accepted this information as valid, here's a question for him:

Why is the spark from a worn out ignition coil red?

It's because the coil isn't producing any amps, just voltage.  So this voltage, only, must be splitting a little of the water present in air as humidity.  Right?

I found out a long time ago how to get a red discharge from my Plasmoid circuit.  I wasn't using any Scientific Method.  I was just experimenting at random, and made an accidental discovery.  That's how I work, and that's the Method I use.  I'm good at making accidental discoveries.  Isn't this still valid to Stan Meyer's system?  Remember that Plasmoid produces an IONIZING RADIATION, red or otherwise.

Whether or not I share this information depends on someone else's attitude. 

[Login to see usernames]

Checking the literature to see what is already known in a given field is part of the Scientific Method.  doobie was using the Scientific Method when he found the information about lightning splitting water, as evidenced by the red component of the glowing discharge.  Now that Ed Mitchel has accepted this information as valid, here's a question for him:

Why is the spark from a worn out ignition coil red?

It's because the coil isn't producing any amps, just voltage.  So this voltage, only, must be splitting a little of the water present in air as humidity.  Right?

I found out a long time ago how to get a red discharge from my Plasmoid circuit.  I wasn't using any Scientific Method.  I was just experimenting at random, and made an accidental discovery.  That's how I work, and that's the Method I use.  I'm good at making accidental discoveries.  Isn't this still valid to Stan Meyer's system?  Remember that Plasmoid produces an IONIZING RADIATION, red or otherwise.

Whether or not I share this information depends on someone else's attitude.

All will be ignored from you as you are not a friend but the opposite and I truly do not feel comfortable talking to you.

[Login to see usernames]

Checking the literature to see what is already known in a given field is part of the Scientific Method.  doobie was using the Scientific Method when he found the information about lightning splitting water, as evidenced by the red component of the glowing discharge.  Now that Ed Mitchel has accepted this information as valid, here's a question for him:

Why is the spark from a worn out ignition coil red?

It's because the coil isn't producing any amps, just voltage.  So this voltage, only, must be splitting a little of the water present in air as humidity.  Right?

I found out a long time ago how to get a red discharge from my Plasmoid circuit.  I wasn't using any Scientific Method.  I was just experimenting at random, and made an accidental discovery.  That's how I work, and that's the Method I use.  I'm good at making accidental discoveries.  Isn't this still valid to Stan Meyer's system?  Remember that Plasmoid produces an IONIZING RADIATION, red or otherwise.

Whether or not I share this information depends on someone else's attitude.

All will be ignored from you as you are not a friend but the opposite and I truly do not feel comfortable talking to you.

Likewise, I will stop reading your messages and any message which quotes your message.  You've accused me of being a racist too many times, always ignoring my answer.  Now you're spelling my user name with a KKK.  In light of your prior behavior, this can be nothing but a slanderous reference to the Klu Klux Klan, the racial hate group.

[Login to see usernames]

placing water between 2 conductive plates cant be called electrolysis because the water has pH7 to begin with . 
water charge is neutral , net zero
anions and cations are of equal number
there is no additive , acid or base

anion OH-  (9p , 10e)  and cation H3O+  (11p , 10e)  = self ionization 

only the self ionization formula fits

I cant find any formula or study of break down of water out side of electrolysis , which is a contamination of a simple experiment which thousands of people must have performed in the last 17 years alone , using straight water

Faraday would most certainly have performed his initial first experiment   ,without any additive .

all the argument against H2 as a fuel always falls back on Electrolysis but once the additive is removed , theres no basic experiment out there to say for or against

[Login to see usernames]

if you compare this to electrolysis is like comparing semiconductor to metals..

in semiconductors there can be positive and negative charge carrier or both... in metals only electrons conducts...

in water is like on a semiconductor... if you get only positive ions inside it will conduct... so as if you had negative ions... or if you had both...

or do you think that neutralizing the acidity would lead to zero current?

well we could test it... get it very pure water mix with acid and test the conductivity... than add base to neutralize the ph and we would have neutral ph... but the point is it would conduct however...

ph is only the proportion between the positive and negative ions in the water latice... not how many net ions...

if we consider that we have both base and acid in equal proportion why should the electrolyte heat if the ions does not need to cross the cell...

this are some questions i have too..


what happens when we mix a saturated base solution with a acid solution... very huge heat come out...

[Login to see usernames]

placing water between 2 conductive plates cant be called electrolysis because the water has pH7 to begin with . 
water charge is neutral , net zero
anions and cations are of equal number
there is no additive , acid or base

anion OH-  (9p , 10e)  and cation H3O+  (11p , 10e)  = self ionization 

only the self ionization formula fits

I cant find any formula or study of break down of water out side of electrolysis , which is a contamination of a simple experiment which thousands of people must have performed in the last 17 years alone , using straight water

Faraday would most certainly have performed his initial first experiment   ,without any additive .

all the argument against H2 as a fuel always falls back on Electrolysis but once the additive is removed , theres no basic experiment out there to say for or against

Do a google search on impact dissociation of water.  There's a lot of non-electrolysis work out there.  This also includes OH splitting on impact with an electrode, or even a particle of water.  It's known that Hydroxyl ions occur naturally in water.  Couldn't a few of them be accelerated to produce an ion cascade?  "Instantly"?