Meyers may have pulsed with 2 transistors

[Login to see usernames]

I have heard of this , if this true .

That meyers was gating and pulsing with 2 transistors , one at the negative side of primary coil and one at positive side .

Somebody plz brg this up from the patent I I can maybe put a possible add-on for this , Its just a slight modification .

[Login to see usernames]

i have read stans tech explaining the signals going to the vic many times.. my clearest understanding up to today is that stans has the pwm operating from both sides of the primary... 1 transistor on the positve side of primary is gating a solid positve analog signal matching the duty cycle.. ..  it is variable from 0-12 volt analog pulses(i think the varable is dependent on duty cycles pulse width).. then on the negative side of the primary its transistor is in sync with the analogs gating (duty cycle) and is gating digital signal with the frequency... stan says he can charge for 15 seconds and produce for 84 seconds on off put stage.. he calls the 94 secs a off put stage so i feel as if hes charging the transformer up and resonating during discharge with a frequency gating with analog side off to alow it to return to ground. its not electric that is seperating the water as much as it is physical force and timing..   people wounder why there isnt current across the cell, that is a simple answer..


it has to do with the laws of attraction and mutual inductance..  the charges building on the core build evenly so they have balance when charging like +500 and -500 is balanced in the chokes and will require more work to cross the water cell then to just capacitate in the vic.. but if you dont have matching coils then you can get a build up of like +500 and -700(caused by difenerent length chokes) and it will lead to a constant current in the cell  negative flowing to positve...if it is +700 and -500 you still get negative flowing to postive but think of the forces involved the positve 700 is more like a vacuum to the negative thats where E.E.C. comes in, the other processes are stricly vibration energy.. being created by pulsating static fields and tuning to the vibration that throws the electrons furthest out of equalibrium like the pendium.. all about timing.. stans quote says a simple physical process.. we know the only thing physical(to move)   water is static.. static is potenial built up in a material of either pos or neg potentials(skinn effect)... so i would say you are hitting water with somthin similar to a sound wave hitting water except that your physical vibration wave isnt due to a object of physical mater vibrating the water, but a vibration of static force physical/ atomicaly interacting with the water.... this is where i stand at the moment but you guys know me, my perspective are all over the place.. this one seems accurate to me.

[Login to see usernames]

This is not shown in the common vic diagram but it may be shown in the controll and driver circuits patent. I am trying to think of an advantage to manipulating both sides of the primary compared to just one, the only thing I can think of so far is to use some feedback from the vic circuit in the circuit that connects to the tail end of the primary, but I dono if that makes sence 

[Login to see usernames]

somebody brging me proof of this from the papers.

Too lazy now .

[Login to see usernames]

Well, if there is any circuitry on the secondary (I doubt there is other then the pumping diode due to the HV...not many solid states around that can handle it)
The advantage would be that the secondary swings both ways and a standard rectifier bridge would give out double frequency but at 1/2 the voltage because an AC oscillation's voltage is the difference between the + and -...and using both outputs would give a greater potential difference....with that being said I would like to point out the pumping diode again...and how the way Stan shows it...the BEMF can only go one way  ...so, again I would probably have to say that attempting to modulate the output in any way is a waste of time...(you want the output to oscillate freely in most RLC circuit....this is a non linear resonance though...so it's a lil different)
Now, if he used both sides of a signal B4 the secondary is another matter...I have read many patents and some say different things...but, some ARE different things

[Login to see usernames]

Dankie,

The only difference is that you can get a sinewave into your primairy coil, when you use a 2 transistor setup. That can work, if you have a 3 wire primairy.
http://www.aaroncake.net/circuits/inverter.asp
http://www.aaroncake.net/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=7123

I personally like the second one better.

Both circuits putting out a sinewave, which can be controlled in frequency.
The frequency range is limited by the propertys of the toroid.

Steve

[Login to see usernames]

so anybody find this ?

[Login to see usernames]

i posted the main points highlighted like a month ago, let me find them and i will repost here and show the main points that im trying to share.. the more times i read it the more clear it becomes.. but try to understand what creates signal 49axxx49n.. from what i gathered the way that the analog on positve side and the digital on the negative side interact with each other is what defines signal 49axxx49n