A green and clean environment is a human right!

Projects by members => Projects by members => Tony Woodside => Topic started by: TonyWoodside on July 08, 2011, 08:54:26 am

Title: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 08, 2011, 08:54:26 am
I am going to attempt to explain how Stan split the water molecule with low currents. Ok first thing, basic electrolysis uses current to slit water by using electron collision. In Stan's system he only wanted to use voltage and no current, which we all know by now. Well I've been digging deep into what Stan says in his lectures and memos. This is what I've come up with and it all make sense with what Stan says. Stan talks about the molecule and its "Ground State". Theground state of a system is its lowest-energy state. The energy of the ground state is known as the zero-point energy of the system. Basically the ground state refers to the electrons being in their correct orbit making them stable. Well Stan's talks about taking the molecule from ground state to excited state. Excitation is an elevation in energy level above an arbitrary baseline energy state. In physics there is a specific technical definition for energy level which is often associated with an atom being excited to an excited state. This means to make the electrons go from their correct orbit up to the next orbit. Like in the water molecule you have 2 orbital shells and the 1st orbit is the "K" shell and the 2nd orbit is the "L" shell. So to make the molecule go from ground state to exited state, the "L" shell electrons will  be ejected to what is know in electronics as the conduction band, which is just an imaginary location outside the orbit of the molecule. Once you have less than 8 electrons occupying the "L", you will then have the 2 electrons from the "K" orbit jumping into the "L" orbit. This will continue till all electrons are in the conduction band and the "K" and "L" orbits are empty. Once the orbits are empty there is obviously no covalent bonding between the Hydrogen and Oxygen atoms at this point.

Now I will explain how this can be achieved. The key to Stan's system is Harmonic Oscillation. The LC circuit has to be made to give a specific Harmonic Oscillation Wave Function. This wave function will mimic a particle equal to that of the electrons. When the electrons are hit will this wave function signal, they will go from ground state into excitation state. If you stop the signal, after a short time period the electrons will emit photons and then return to ground state. This is why Stan say pulse for X amount of time and then gate and gas will be produces for another X time period. The gate will allow the photon energy to be released and this photon energy will continue to produce more gas and allow the water to go back to ground state.

The Harmonic Oscillation Wave Function is very similar to an AM signal. The signal has to be the correct band of frequencies in order to split the water molecule. Puharich gives these specific frequency bands ( 3.98kHz, 7.96kHz, 15.95kHz, and 31.84kHz, which these frequencies are all sub-harmonics of 63.68kHz ) need to split the molecule. I've noticed in Stan's setup he uses chokes in around 1H each and if you calculate the capacitance of a single tube it will be around 1.6nF, by using L= 1H and C= 1.6nF, the resonant frequency will be 3.98kHz....is this just coincidence? I think NOT. Research Meyer and Puharich's system and you will see that these two system are very much alike. Here are some references on what I've just explained, research it and you will see that this is the way it was done.

http://dev.physicslab.org/asp/applets/javaphysmath/java/atomphoton/default.asp (http://dev.physicslab.org/asp/applets/javaphysmath/java/atomphoton/default.asp)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonic_oscillator (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonic_oscillator)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_wave (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_wave)

http://www.brightstorm.com/science/physics/the-atom-and-quantum-physics/matter-wave-de-broglie-wavelength (http://www.brightstorm.com/science/physics/the-atom-and-quantum-physics/matter-wave-de-broglie-wavelength)

http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/vibrat.html (http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/vibrat.html)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morse_potential (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morse_potential)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_harmonic_oscillator (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_harmonic_oscillator)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecular_vibration (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecular_vibration)

http://butane.chem.uiuc.edu/pshapley/GenChem2/A7/1.html (http://butane.chem.uiuc.edu/pshapley/GenChem2/A7/1.html)

http://www.thefullwiki.org/Nuclear_magnetic_resonance (http://www.thefullwiki.org/Nuclear_magnetic_resonance)

http://gregegan.customer.netspace.net.au/ORTHOGONAL/07/QM.html (http://gregegan.customer.netspace.net.au/ORTHOGONAL/07/QM.html)

http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Quantum_LC_circuit (http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Quantum_LC_circuit)

http://centros.edu.xunta.es/iesames/webantiga/webfq/EUSECTSUSO/chem_phys_bac/Chemistry_2/chemical_bonding.htm (http://centros.edu.xunta.es/iesames/webantiga/webfq/EUSECTSUSO/chem_phys_bac/Chemistry_2/chemical_bonding.htm)

http://universe-review.ca/F12-molecule.htm (http://universe-review.ca/F12-molecule.htm)

Hope This info sheds some light on this process and how it works.

Thanks,
Tony Woodside

Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 08, 2011, 15:06:43 pm
Tony,

Based on the resonance cell specs we can calculate the capacitance:
permittivity (?)    =    708     picofarad/meter     (for water)
length (l)    =    2.75     inch
outer conductor diameter (b)    =    0.6250     inch     (based on air-gap 0.0625 inch)
inner conductor diameter (a)    =    0.5     inch

Note:
Now the specs used for the cell has a rod in the middle and is longer than the outer tube so it has more capacitance.
What you have (1.6nF) should be almost correct for the 5RC time.

Measured values:
C1(pos)=1262mH  (positive choke who has effect on resonance according to Dynodon)
C2(neg)=1138mH (tuned for balancing opposite and equal voltages [pos and neg exciters] and restrict current)

Fr=3.79kHz (calculated resonance frequency C1 and Cell) Is close to 3.98kHz which called the center frequency!

Question:
Isn't the frequency shifting above and below 3.98kHz? If the PLL has a lock it doesn't mean it has exactly 3.98kHz lock.

Here some math based on Meyer and Puharich..they both say the RC time is 5kHz...this doesnt mean to pulse the circuit at 5kHz, this is just the RC time. Using the RC formula RC= 1/(2pi*f*C) we can find the pulsing frequency to fully charge the WFC. We know that the RC time is 5kHz and the cell used had a capacitance of 1.6nF, 3" single tube cell. So it breaks down like this:
RC = 1/(2pi*f*C)
5kHz = 1/(2pi*f*1.6nF)
f = (1/(2pi*1.6nF)) / 5kHz
f = 19904.46Hz
Now we have to take 19904.46Hz and divide it by 5, the reason we divide by 5 is because the 19904.46Hz is the RC total which equals to 5 Time Constants, 5TC.
19904.46Hz / 5 = 3980.89Hz
This 3980.89 Hz is the frequency that the circuit should be pulsed at. This number should look familiar because Puharich states this frequency in his water splitter patent!!!

-Tony Woodside-
http://www.globalkast.com

Don't know if it is important but what I also found is this:
Sec=1047mH. Notice (Sec+C1) =>1047+1262 =(2309/2)=1154mH comes close to C2 (1138mH)

What about the gate frequency to get the "resonant action" starting between the exciters?

Br,
Webmug
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 08, 2011, 23:05:06 pm
I will try to make a picture collage this weekend of all pictures I think could be useful to explain my ideas. Pictures explain best.

What do you mean when talking about resonance. Resonance of what? H2O, H2+O, H2, H H, H+? In my opinion we have two major tasks for H2 dissociation.
- H2O -> H2 + O via pulsed electric fields. Maybe even H2 -> H H
- H2 -> H H or -> H+ via photo dissociation.
Getting H2 could be enough though.

I just started to work myself into this topic and am still gathering informations. Until today I thought everything could be done by electric fields but when I read about photo dissociation I thought this could be useful too, especialy for the H2 -> HH part.

So I found this Document. http://www.freidok.uni-freiburg.de/volltexte/33/pdf/33_1.pdf  The diagrams and schematics of the experiment set-up had some interesting informations.
They used a laser with 400nm and a laser with 800nm whereas the 800nm laser created most ions. Red laser pointers have about 650nm so I think I will experiment with that. I don't know how fast it's possible to puls them but even as a continues photon source it could be useful. They also used piezo pumps and shot at the H2 in an rectangular angle, like Meyer did.

@TonyWoodside: Your Youtube videos showed that you were successful in replicating Meyer's electronics. What do you want to improve or on what are you working now? Have you tried to measure how many Watts you need for a liter?

Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 12, 2011, 21:32:10 pm
I will try to make a picture collage this weekend of all pictures I think could be useful to explain my ideas. Pictures explain best.

What do you mean when talking about resonance. Resonance of what? H2O, H2+O, H2, H H, H+? In my opinion we have two major tasks for H2 dissociation.
- H2O -> H2 + O via pulsed electric fields. Maybe even H2 -> H H
- H2 -> H H or -> H+ via photo dissociation.
Getting H2 could be enough though.

I just started to work myself into this topic and am still gathering informations. Until today I thought everything could be done by electric fields but when I read about photo dissociation I thought this could be useful too, especialy for the H2 -> HH part.

So I found this Document. http://www.freidok.uni-freiburg.de/volltexte/33/pdf/33_1.pdf  The diagrams and schematics of the experiment set-up had some interesting informations.
They used a laser with 400nm and a laser with 800nm whereas the 800nm laser created most ions. Red laser pointers have about 650nm so I think I will experiment with that. I don't know how fast it's possible to puls them but even as a continues photon source it could be useful. They also used piezo pumps and shot at the H2 in an rectangular angle, like Meyer did.

@TonyWoodside: Your Youtube videos showed that you were successful in replicating Meyer's electronics. What do you want to improve or on what are you working now? Have you tried to measure how many Watts you need for a liter?

Thanks for that pdf, Lektor.
Good info on that laser frequency. Ions are the charge carriers in water.
I do have at this moment some basic lasers in my lab and playing with them to find out what the story is behind them.
Meyer explains a lot about them. Nobody reported yet that they had better results in production or efficiency with help of lasers.
The pdf is fascinating in a way that they might show us some direction in how to apply a laser.

Lektor, you talk about Meyer shooting at H2 in a rectangular manner. Can you specify more, please?

Steve
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 13, 2011, 09:22:19 am
I think I have recognized a simularity between both experiment setups.
In this picture ( http://www.globalkast.com/images/stanmeyer/4826581b.jpg (http://www.globalkast.com/images/stanmeyer/4826581b.jpg)  the H2 is transported from bottom to top and LED's are emitting photons rectangular to the motion of the H2.

In the PDF file at "Konzept 1" on page 69 the H2 is shot via a piezo pump from left to right and a laser crosses this pass rectangular to it.

I think I have a better way to do it but I have to make some diagram to explain it.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 13, 2011, 22:08:34 pm
I made a quick drawing with power point.

The laser beam gets reflected many times in this pipe increasing the amount of photons colliding with elektrons.  The diameter of the pipe can be larger than the diameter of the hose to slow down the gas through the pipe and increasing the duration of the gas in the pipe -> more collisions -> more HH, H+.

(http://www.ionizationx.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2121.0;attach=9137)
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 14, 2011, 10:51:45 am
I am going to attempt to explain how Stan split the water molecule with low currents. Ok first thing, basic electrolysis uses current to slit water by using electron collision. In Stan's system he only wanted to use voltage and no current, which we all know by now. Well I've been digging deep into what Stan says in his lectures and memos. This is what I've come up with and it all make sense with what Stan says. Stan talks about the molecule and its "Ground State". Theground state of a system is its lowest-energy state. The energy of the ground state is known as the zero-point energy of the system. Basically the ground state refers to the electrons being in their correct orbit making them stable. Well Stan's talks about taking the molecule from ground state to excited state. Excitation is an elevation in energy level above an arbitrary baseline energy state. In physics there is a specific technical definition for energy level which is often associated with an atom being excited to an excited state. This means to make the electrons go from their correct orbit up to the next orbit. Like in the water molecule you have 2 orbital shells and the 1st orbit is the "K" shell and the 2nd orbit is the "L" shell. So to make the molecule go from ground state to exited state, the "L" shell electrons will  be ejected to what is know in electronics as the conduction band, which is just an imaginary location outside the orbit of the molecule. Once you have less than 8 electrons occupying the "L", you will then have the 2 electrons from the "K" orbit jumping into the "L" orbit. This will continue till all electrons are in the conduction band and the "K" and "L" orbits are empty. Once the orbits are empty there is obviously no covalent bonding between the Hydrogen and Oxygen atoms at this point.

Now I will explain how this can be achieved. The key to Stan's system is Harmonic Oscillation. The LC circuit has to be made to give a specific Harmonic Oscillation Wave Function. This wave function will mimic a particle equal to that of the electrons. When the electrons are hit will this wave function signal, they will go from ground state into excitation state. If you stop the signal, after a short time period the electrons will emit photons and then return to ground state. This is why Stan say pulse for X amount of time and then gate and gas will be produces for another X time period. The gate will allow the photon energy to be released and this photon energy will continue to produce more gas and allow the water to go back to ground state.

The Harmonic Oscillation Wave Function is very similar to an AM signal. The signal has to be the correct band of frequencies in order to split the water molecule. Puharich gives these specific frequency bands ( 3.98kHz, 7.96kHz, 15.95kHz, and 31.84kHz, which these frequencies are all sub-harmonics of 63.68kHz ) need to split the molecule. I've noticed in Stan's setup he uses chokes in around 1H each and if you calculate the capacitance of a single tube it will be around 1.6nF, by using L= 1H and C= 1.6nF, the resonant frequency will be 3.98kHz....is this just coincidence? I think NOT. Research Meyer and Puharich's system and you will see that these two system are very much alike. Here are some references on what I've just explained, research it and you will see that this is the way it was done.

http://dev.physicslab.org/asp/applets/javaphysmath/java/atomphoton/default.asp (http://dev.physicslab.org/asp/applets/javaphysmath/java/atomphoton/default.asp)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonic_oscillator (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonic_oscillator)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_wave (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_wave)

http://www.brightstorm.com/science/physics/the-atom-and-quantum-physics/matter-wave-de-broglie-wavelength (http://www.brightstorm.com/science/physics/the-atom-and-quantum-physics/matter-wave-de-broglie-wavelength)

http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/vibrat.html (http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/vibrat.html)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morse_potential (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morse_potential)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_harmonic_oscillator (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_harmonic_oscillator)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecular_vibration (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecular_vibration)

http://butane.chem.uiuc.edu/pshapley/GenChem2/A7/1.html (http://butane.chem.uiuc.edu/pshapley/GenChem2/A7/1.html)

http://www.thefullwiki.org/Nuclear_magnetic_resonance (http://www.thefullwiki.org/Nuclear_magnetic_resonance)

http://gregegan.customer.netspace.net.au/ORTHOGONAL/07/QM.html (http://gregegan.customer.netspace.net.au/ORTHOGONAL/07/QM.html)

http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Quantum_LC_circuit (http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Quantum_LC_circuit)

http://centros.edu.xunta.es/iesames/webantiga/webfq/EUSECTSUSO/chem_phys_bac/Chemistry_2/chemical_bonding.htm (http://centros.edu.xunta.es/iesames/webantiga/webfq/EUSECTSUSO/chem_phys_bac/Chemistry_2/chemical_bonding.htm)

http://universe-review.ca/F12-molecule.htm (http://universe-review.ca/F12-molecule.htm)

Hope This info sheds some light on this process and how it works.

Thanks,
Tony Woodside

Tony,

If you take your theory futher towards the alternator, then there are two options.
Or we speed the alternator up to the level that the output on on phase is around 500 hz, or we pulse the rotor with 3.9khz.
Maybe even both?

Interesting....
There is a need for running tests with this.

Steve
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 14, 2011, 10:54:12 am
I made a quick drawing with power point.

The laser beam gets reflected many times in this pipe increasing the amount of photons colliding with elektrons.  The diameter of the pipe can be larger than the diameter of the hose to slow down the gas through the pipe and increasing the duration of the gas in the pipe -> more collisions -> more HH, H+.

(http://www.ionizationx.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2121.0;attach=9137)

Thank you...
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 14, 2011, 20:09:54 pm
@ Steve & Lektor.

Shouldn't a reply regarding ionizing hydrogen and like be placed with "Start here your topics on the water injector & ambient air-gas processor system (http://www.ionizationx.com/index.php/topic,1251.msg20659/topicseen.html#msg20659)" or a similar tread since this tread is in regards to what is happening within the electronics and water molecule??
[/size]I am glad to see Lektor is jumping on the process, I am, but felt I needed to make a remark on this.
[/size]
[/size]
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 14, 2011, 21:49:14 pm
I was thinking along those same lines, only adding in a multi-refracting surface in the center to scatter the laser throughout the tube.

Robert

Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 14, 2011, 22:07:21 pm
Well, you could read Meyers patents in regards to EGR and Gas Processor and then read the PDF I wrote located in Reply #35 - page 8, that should help you understand what it is.
hmm you are right Iontruster. This might not be the right place to post this "method" for photo dissociation but neither I think that it's fits to "water injector" or "ambient air-gas processor". I understood your quoted post in that thread as if the purpose of the ambient air gas processor is to add ambient air to the h2 to produce some kind auf natural gas (eureka). My post is rather a general suggestion on how to produce HH or H+ (if it works). And photo dissociation was one point Tony Woodside mentioned.  Well never mind.

@askemeHHOw: I thought the same but on the other hand I thought - does it makes sense. It makes it bit more complicated. The laser produces some amount of photons and whether it is scattered or used as a beam shouldn't make any difference. The beam will travel with the speed of light and hit many electrons. Also it would be good to check how much of a difference it would make to use UV lamps or simple LEDs.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 14, 2011, 22:49:14 pm
@ Lektor.

I understand you'r line of thinking. But HH is a non chemical title. It is either in a molecular state as H2, or it is an ion or in its atomic state 1H. In its atomic state, the net charge will be zero as there are equal amount of protons, neutrons and electrons (1). If the atom becomes charged up with an added electron, it will become an anion - H- - If it loses its electron it will become H+ (as in a proton) a cation. Now, one more important thing. In order for a atom or ion to become charged or exist in a higher energy state, we need to add energy. The same energy you add will be released - nothing gained or lost in that sense, besides when we look at heat conversion, when some of the energy is converted into photons (visible spectrum and non visible spectrum - UV and IR) due to electron and molecular friction, then some of this added energy will be lost. Hydrogen ions is very short - I do not remember the exact timeline, but non the less quit short. If you manage - IF - to capture all the energy released from an excited ion (which by the way is only theoretical) you will have 100% efficiency and no system have 100% efficiency, there are always losses. So, in order to use a hydrogen ion in a higher state releasing the extra energy, you would need to do that in close environment to the event where you want that energy - aka. combustion cylinder. But no such engine exist since you do not gain anything even if you have moments of energy bursts, the over all action will be a loss in energy.

Now... I want everyone to consider the options and why things are sett in motion. Ponder the concept of creating a fuel molecule in line with my description and also what Meyer is talking about. Why he pumped up the atoms in his gas processor. Really ponder it. I am not talking about whether pulsed light should be used or LED's should be used - but look at one word in Meyers patent - "Coherent" which means together. In regards to modern technology, we know that LED's have become brighter - or have a higher candela number (The candela is the SI base unit of luminous intensity). Now also consider that in a Gas Processor you want the photons widely spread, hitting as much electrons as possible- as long as you are using photons within the absorption line of hydrogen, which type will interact best - spread or focused? Using the incoming air as LASING material, wouldn't that create a situation where focused light can be produced within the chambers or partial LASER?
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 14, 2011, 23:51:04 pm
Just as Puharich states the reason for the water splitting, "It is assumed that this dispersion is the result of phonon vibration between the four vertices of the tetrahedron water molecule...two sets of lone pair electrons and two hydrogen protons."
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 15, 2011, 07:31:47 am
I made a quick drawing with power point.

The laser beam gets reflected many times in this pipe increasing the amount of photons colliding with elektrons.  The diameter of the pipe can be larger than the diameter of the hose to slow down the gas through the pipe and increasing the duration of the gas in the pipe -> more collisions -> more HH, H+.

(http://www.ionizationx.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2121.0;attach=9137)

Sorry to be the rain on your parade, you have H2 / HH going into your reflective tube? how did you remove the O/O2? i know there is a patent that has the HV sorting of the molecule, but i havn't seen anyone do that yet... also your reflective surface will loose efficiency quickly as you are dealing with water, you need a degree of error to occur in your system, any fluid coming into that reflective tube is going to turn to condensation and if no removed possible marking/rust... Good idea though.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 17, 2011, 11:30:17 am
Good question, CrazyEwok.

There are now cells that can produce separate H and O.

Steve
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 18, 2011, 06:50:18 am
Very true, your efficiency for gas production goes down though. As far as I know, you need to separate the plates with a physical medium, while still allowing current to flow. I suppose if you had 2x plates at moderate distance (2-3mm) you could place a small opening above each plate, recirculating water via a pump between the 2 plates to keep the gasses separated. you would still have some steam/condensation going up each exit pipe though.

How would having O2 present in your reflective chamber work if you were able to remove any water mist? would it break the O2 down into O- or O+ ? Would the environment turn it into Ozone? If so would this effect the combustion of the gas?
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 18, 2011, 22:40:32 pm
sorry, because of a lack of  time  I can't go too deep into this.
This tube thing was rather a theoretical approach on how it could be possible to enhance the hydrogen production by photo dissociation. But it's good that you wrote down your thoughts - maybe a few people can use this info.
I have to focus on the dissociation of water first.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 19, 2011, 08:24:28 am
Here is a video I made of the VIC circuit connected to my VIC Transformer with a single tube cell. This what the resonant waveform looks like. I just need to tune my coils to the correct value and then I should see some nice gas production :)

Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 19, 2011, 18:42:41 pm
Tony,

I believe many of us like me have produced this waveform and have tried countless combinations of gate length and pulse train length.

Making a 2kv pulse at resonance with a nice coil seems to be only part of the equation.

Looking into time constants and very low ma inputs still has not made any more gas for me than straight dc into the cell on a watt for watt basis.

It still seems to me that someone would have tripped over the correct settings by now with all the sharp tinkerers here and elsewhere.

The avalanche effect has still not been reproduced by anyone as far as I know.

Still a mystery with no end in sight.

kb

Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 19, 2011, 19:30:04 pm
This waveform does the same functions as Puharich states in his writings. I will explain what it does. The smaller AM pulses are to match the electron & proton resonance, the larger AM waves will modulate the the smaller AM waves which should match the NMR of the water molecule. So you have two resonances taking place at the same time to match certain aspects of the water molecule. I am still withholding some information about how these perimeters are calculated.  I still have to tune my chokes to the correct values so to produce the correct frequencies needed. I will tell you this, Stan's writings on the chokes is misleading in order to protect the patent, they are not equal as he states in the patent!
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 19, 2011, 20:27:55 pm
I see...  withholding... hmmm   I'm curious as to why

Tony,

help me understand how tuning the coil changes the frequency as determined by the pwm????  it would appear that the coil responds to various frequencies accordingly,  perhaps I'm missing something yet I can buy into the different sized coils because meyer does use a variable choke on the negative lead in some of his work.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 19, 2011, 20:33:40 pm
Yes sir, in his earlier setup he used a variable inductor in the -Ve of the LC circuit. Now do you know why he used this?
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 20, 2011, 00:52:01 am
I just don't wanna give away the information that I have worked hard on with long hours of research. I want you to learn what is happening here. Like the old saying, "Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day, Teach a man to fish and he'll eat for a lifetime." Same principle applies here.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 20, 2011, 01:32:59 am
I've been saying for well over a year that this is what the resonant signal should look like. Based on my research, this signal serves two specific purposes. 1) The smaller AM signals are to match the resonance of the electrons of the molecule. 2) The larger and slower AM signal modulates the smaller AM signals and what this does is setup the resonance of the Nuclear Magnetic Relaxation (NMR) cycle of the proton water.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 20, 2011, 07:56:57 am
Yes sir, in his earlier setup he used a variable inductor in the -Ve of the LC circuit. Now do you know why he used this?

Variable choke because Meyer's early setup was stuck at 10, 100, 10k, 100k hz frequency.

Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 21, 2011, 01:14:03 am
Yes sir, in his earlier setup he used a variable inductor in the -Ve of the LC circuit. Now do you know why he used this?

Variable choke because Meyer's early setup was stuck at 10, 100, 10k, 100k hz frequency.

No sir, that's not the answer I'm looking for. Anybody else got an answer?
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 21, 2011, 02:03:29 am
why was there a variable inductor on the negative only?

my guess as to why there is a variable inductor on the -ve is for the ability to tune the lc circuit to the capacitor whose properties would be variable with water type and quality used .......???????????
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 21, 2011, 02:10:40 am
nope...I'll give you a hint. Both inductors serve two different purposes. L1 is a fixed value and it serves the purpose of HV resonance in the LC circuit and also serves a specific resonance with the water molecule. So why is L2 variable? What purpose does it serve?
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 21, 2011, 05:39:35 am
Variable inductor-----Possibly to match the resistance of the water between the tube sets to the inductor.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 21, 2011, 06:13:49 am
Variable inductor-----Possibly to match the resistance of the water between the tube sets to the inductor.

not really...think about it guys...u need to know about an inductor and capacitor being used together, what does it form?
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 21, 2011, 09:52:10 am
In my opinion it probably functions as a filter to only let through a certain frequency band.
Regards,
Sharky
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 21, 2011, 15:55:16 pm
In my opinion it probably functions as a filter to only let through a certain frequency band.
Regards,
Sharky

You're on the right track, can you be more specific?
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 21, 2011, 16:16:49 pm
I'm thinking about 'side bands' and center frequency.
The L2 choke has opposite phase of L1 and can be adjusted to give a proper side bands to set resonance of the protons and electrons.
There is a resonance in the side bands at GHz frequencies...

Also what about the air-gap of the resonant cell? Puharich talks about 22.3GHz(wave length water resonance) found 20..40GHz EM in the sidebands and talks about 14mm gap. Thats full wavelength so 1/4 wavelength has still 3.36mm air-gap???
Did SM used a harmonic?

Br,
Webmug
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 21, 2011, 17:30:17 pm
Variable inductor-----Possibly to match the resistance of the water between the tube sets to the inductor.

not really...think about it guys...u need to know about an inductor and capacitor being used together, what does it form?

How can you multiply the energy?

Why a pair of coils?

Don't wait for magic it wont come. If you don't understand why the things are there, you'll never get it.

Is not only about resonating at a particular frequency...

It has to do with many other things...

i won't give a clue

just some pepper cause my work is mine.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 21, 2011, 18:50:15 pm
a once interesting board is now populated by off-putting comments and superior acting quizes.....

pomp·ous? ?[pom-puh(http://sp.dictionary.com/dictstatic/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.png)s]  –adjective 1. characterized by an ostentatious display of dignity or importance: a pompous minor official. 2. ostentatiously lofty or high-flown: a pompous speech. 3. characterized by pomp (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pomp),  stately splendor, or magnificence.

when someone here has demonstrated the avalanche effect then they can effectively act the part and be recognized, until then you guys are coming off as know it alls....

sheeshhh

kb
.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 21, 2011, 18:58:06 pm
KB, i totally agree with you, this is becoming a non-productive i know something you don't know discussion ...
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 21, 2011, 19:06:53 pm
If I tell you straight out what it does, then you have learned NOTHING. You need to learn the technology in order to replicate it. That's why nobody has been able to successfully replicate this technology, cuz they don't understand it. This technology involves a lot more physics than electronics know how. The electronics only generate the signals...the physics will tell you what signals to generate. So you need to know this!
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 21, 2011, 19:12:59 pm
give me a break, you don't know how I learn and your attitude is something I'm familiar with....

I took up this meyer thing up four years ago to learn electronics, something I always wanted to know more about, simple as that, I used it as a vehicle of sorts....

it has been said that the genius Einstein was a brilliant man yet he could not speak spanish, even the little kids in mexico know spanish and speak it well, to them he is a bit slow, however,  I don't believe they would suggest he learn it in the fashion you proscribe for some of us who ask a question or two

sheesh again

kb
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 21, 2011, 19:14:10 pm
I'm thinking about 'side bands' and center frequency.
The L2 choke has opposite phase of L1 and can be adjusted to give a proper side bands to set resonance of the protons and electrons.
There is a resonance in the side bands at GHz frequencies...

Also what about the air-gap of the resonant cell? Puharich talks about 22.3GHz(wave length water resonance) found 20..40GHz EM in the sidebands and talks about 14mm gap. Thats full wavelength so 1/4 wavelength has still 3.36mm air-gap???
Did SM used a harmonic?

Br,
Webmug

Yes, Stan used harmonics. You are getting very close to what I'm looking for :) Do you know why Stan had to make the L2 choke out of phase?

Yeah Puharich's cell was 9" long and had a gap of 14mm....Stan's resonant cavity tubes had an effective capacitance length of 2.5" and a gap of 2.413mm.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 21, 2011, 19:19:13 pm
give me a break, you don't know how I learn and your attitude is something I'm familiar with....

I took up this meyer thing up four years ago to learn electronics, something I always wanted to know more about, simple as that, I used it as a vehicle of sorts....

it has been said that the genius Einstein was a brilliant man yet he could not speak spanish, even the little kids in mexico know spanish and speak it well, to them he is a bit slow, however,  I don't believe they would suggest he learn it in the fashion you proscribe for some of us who ask a question or two

sheesh again

kb

Why all the attitude? I'm just wanting people to understand this stuff. I didn't see this kind of attitude when DynoDon questioned people on the Gate pulsing circuit. He just wanted people to learn. I am doing the same. I could have very well kept my mouth shut and never said anything about this discovery that I made and another 4 years would pass and there would still be no success of the WFC tech.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 21, 2011, 19:34:27 pm
I'm thinking about 'side bands' and center frequency.
The L2 choke has opposite phase of L1 and can be adjusted to give a proper side bands to set resonance of the protons and electrons.
There is a resonance in the side bands at GHz frequencies...

Also what about the air-gap of the resonant cell? Puharich talks about 22.3GHz(wave length water resonance) found 20..40GHz EM in the sidebands and talks about 14mm gap. Thats full wavelength so 1/4 wavelength has still 3.36mm air-gap???
Did SM used a harmonic?

Br,
Webmug

Yes, Stan used harmonics. You are getting very close to what I'm looking for :) Do you know why Stan had to make the L2 choke out of phase?

Yeah Puharich's cell was 9" long and had a gap of 14mm....Stan's resonant cavity tubes had an effective capacitance length of 2.75" and a gap of 2.413mm.
NOTE: The gap is smaller than 2.413mm, 0.0625 inch = 1.5875 millimeters! What I read it is 1.5mm thick 0.75inch outer diameter, 2.75inch length. I want to use a 20mm outer diameter and 2mm thick 2.75inch length tube to get 1.65mm air-gap!
1/8th wave = 1.68mm (22.3GHz)

No, I think I have not an answer for the L2 out of phase question. I'm just trying to cross reference SM and Puharich parts and names.
I guess that the air-gap is used for a harmonic lower than 1/8 of the wave length! Maybe he used the L2 for tuning into this?

Since Puharich said in one of his presentations, it is very important to have the exact air-gap and dimensions of a cell!

Br,
Webmug
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 21, 2011, 19:48:43 pm
Dear ionizationx member, Tony is correct - no one argued when Don played his game, changed tactics, told people he did not know nor had info or pictures, and weeks later actually had AND had it all allong.. why no complaints? - simple answer - you needed him. I understand why Tony is presenting the solution in the way he does, there are many reasons for this, but for most - learning and discovery - he is showing you the path, take a walk with him and consider the questions, take your time with it. For I understand what it mean to give out information with no gratitude in return and also what it means when people do not understand what they have been told, a signifigant discovery that changes everything.. and I mean EVERYTHING. If you are *  of, take a moment and take a deep breath and enter with another energy, solve the "problem" like Einstein.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 21, 2011, 19:51:58 pm
The L2 coil is out of phase from the L1 coil so that it will make square wave pulses act like that of an AC signal. Meyer's was doing the same as Puharich and he had to use pulsed DC and configure the coils to this arrangement so he could generate a signal similar to a sine wave so that he could get around Puharich's patent and could patent it as his own.

This is how I came up with the gap of 2.413mm (0.095") based on the measurements that Don took from Stan's cavity. Note the wall thickness is 0.030" and the outer tubes has an OD of 0.75".

(http://www.globalkast.com/images/stanmeyer/Resonant_Cavity_Tube_Measurements.png) (http://www.globalkast.com/images/stanmeyer/Resonant_Cavity_Tube_Measurements.png)
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 21, 2011, 19:56:47 pm
Tony,

perhaps a LOL or two would have better shown my attitude, it was on the light side yet I can see how you may have interpreted it...  musta hit a nerve

fundamentally, the variables are input frequency, gated frequency, coil response, two pieces of steel with a particular gap in water..........

I stand by my earlier statements regarding the nature of the recent board posts, it is off-putting and arrogant sounding no less

dynodon has posts on various boards going back years, you can see the learning curve, why bring him into this just because he quized also?

having fun while learning, now looking into the tetrahedron and atomic structure stuff, keep up the lead, in general your posts are interesting and thought provoking

ionthruster, nobody here needs to take a breath, I did comment on dons quiz as well I believe, mentioned the circuit found at rex research

you guys are acting a bit tightly wound today

kb

kb

Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 21, 2011, 20:11:00 pm
Tony,

nice work and welcomed, I'll duplicate and keep plugging along

warmest reagrds

kb
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 21, 2011, 21:09:32 pm

speedymetals 304

0.68 id versus 0.69 with a 0.35 thickness versus a 0.30 thus leaves a gap of .090 versus the .095 as you suggested based on 4" inner and 2.75" outer

perhaps meyer was using commercially available stock?

I'll be looking around some more

kb

Product
Quantity
Length (in)
Sub Total:
1/2" {A} Rd 304 Stainless Steel, Cold Finished, Annealed-By the Inch (https://www.speedymetals.com/p-1846-12-rd-304-stainless-steel-cold-finished-annealed.aspx)
SKU: 4r.5
Length Tolerance: Plus 1/8", Minus 0
Material Inch Price: \$0.44
Total Material Price: \$1.76
Total Process Fee: \$0.00
Approximate Piece Weight: 0.22 lbs

Item Notes:
- Max Length 105"
\$1.76
3/4" OD {A} x 0.680" ID {B} x .035" {C} Wall Tube 304 Stainless Steel, Annealed-By the Inch (https://www.speedymetals.com/p-4475-34-od-x-0035-wall-tube-304-stainless-steel-annealed.aspx)
SKU: t4r.75x.035
Length Tolerance: Plus 1/8", Minus 0
Material Inch Price: \$0.50
Total Material Price: \$1.50
Total Process Fee: \$0.00
Approximate Piece Weight: 0.06 lbs

Item Notes:
- Max Length 60".
\$1.50
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 21, 2011, 22:22:44 pm
The L2 coil is out of phase from the L1 coil so that it will make square wave pulses act like that of an AC signal. Meyer's was doing the same as Puharich and he had to use pulsed DC and configure the coils to this arrangement so he could generate a signal similar to a sine wave so that he could get around Puharich's patent and could patent it as his own.
Puharich said that "a unipolar pulsed DC will be formed when a AC wave (AM?) signal is going into a tubular resonant cavity."

Also SM said in his lecture what I remembered, that when "resonant action" is active "unipolar pulses are formed"

You also should check it again in the videos!

Somehow I can't find this in physics text books, can you?

Br,
Webmug
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 21, 2011, 23:01:06 pm

speedymetals 304

0.68 id versus 0.69 with a 0.35 thickness versus a 0.30 thus leaves a gap of .090 versus the .095 as you suggested based on 4" inner and 2.75" outer

perhaps meyer was using commercially available stock?

I'll be looking around some more

kb

Make sense to me, he used the famous KISS method  8)

If there is commercially available stock with wall thickness of 0.03 inch = 0.762 millimeters? Also in EU?
(conversions from mm to inch inch to mm ->makes me crazy :o)

Br,
Webmug
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 22, 2011, 00:46:23 am
yep, I know what you mean, since .03 is about 1/32" I use that for a frame of reference, four physics courses at the Univ. of Minnesota thirty five years ago aint helping out much now, lol

my current  exp. cell now is 1" outer with 7/8" inner and a 1/64 gap and both three inches long, with the center filled with epoxy

I'm going to the scrap yard tomorrow as speedymetals wants \$20 UPS to send me the \$4 of parts...

the audiophile websites have a bit of discussion on out of phase coils interacting and that is where I'm re-learning and hopefully applying the comments here to make some headway toward producing a unipolar pulse on the oscope

kb

Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 22, 2011, 00:53:36 am
1/32 equals       .03125, again horseshoes and hand grenades
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 22, 2011, 07:42:19 am
I'll call your bluff tw! I think your answer while it maybe the form of calculation is not the reason for the variable inductance...

Let me share the cross over of physics and electronics that is going on here (based on what you imply is happening, resonance and gas production). Meyers used frequency presets for his input, he had set frequencies to work with. Variable inductors are easier to make than trimmers and pots(this point is important, especially for the KISS part). His whole cell and electronics is designed to resonate. We all know the LC Resonance calculations. So his inductors then capacitance cell is in a LC circuit.

Have  any of you measured the capacitance of your cells when they are immersed in water verses when they are empty? You will find there is a dramatic difference. So how do we ensure that resonance continues when our capacitance changes?
You can adjust circuit frequency, inductance or capacitance. He had set frequencies, so he needed to bridge the steps in frequencies. I would say he did the calculations for his cell (based on capacitance) and then made his inductors. Realizing how wide the range is on a variable inductor he more than likely only needed one in his circuit to bridge out the frequecy steps. This would also be why he stated that the gap in the cell could be changed also. Change the gap size to adjust the cell capacity to ensure resonance. Covering all 3 variable to maintain resonance in patents meant no technical work around.

So yes you are right, partially. There is a relation between the cell dimensions and the variable inductor. Your answer is far more complicated than it needed to be and is a bit backwards. The inductance/frequency range needs to accommodate the cell from 0 production (full capacitance) to full production (lowest capacitance).
The unfortunate thing is that a cell full of H2 O2 is not the same capacitance as air. Something else to consider is a moving dielectric has different properties to a stationary one.

Having 2 inductors in a resonant circuit won't turn a signal from square to analogous. A transformer will though.

Stans system is different from AP's in every way except concept and working principal... As their origins and original purpose were different. AP's came from observations from his experiments on his own line in health and well being, more accidental. Stan, I would say, didn't want anything to do with the rest of what AP was doing so took the PRINCIPAL and the PROCESS of what was happening and made something that did only that. One small part in what AP's machine can do. (instead of using a bus to get yourself to and from work you take the principal and concept and take a car :P bad link but simple)

What you have done is dictated the dimensions and thus capacity range of Stans cell based on the information you aquired. What i have done is shown you how to know what inductor you need for your already made cell...
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 22, 2011, 08:35:48 am
The resonant action is described in the fracturing cell patent. Free electrons and positive protons speed are more than twice greater than other charged particles species in the water, so they get accelerated towards the respective opposite sign field zone, when the field reverses the electrons and the protons collide forming monoatomic hydrogen gas than this will release heat forming the diatomic gas molecule. Similarly the OH- gains one electron and eject the H+ atom, than the O-- forms to o2 also releasing heat and 2 free electrons...

However to get this point you need a power supply..

and meyer uses the water as electrical source and gas source and feedback back the electrical energy to the polarization process than the gain become exponential-

with a reduction in capacitance of 100 you can have a gain of 99x being charge conserved...

Using water as the electrical source of course allow for the destabilization of the gas thru the simple series eec amp consuming element...

Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 22, 2011, 08:59:04 am
Some of you guys have no idea what the variations in inductance have to do with this circuit. It's by far the most important part of the process. With out this, HV's alone will do nothing to the water molecule. I've generated more than 4kv across the molecule and have gotten ZERO production, not one single bubble formation. The chokes are independent of each other for the most part. His formulas of L1+L2 added together to get resonance with the cell is a misdirection in this case to protect his process. There's a couple of guys who are on the right track with what they are saying, they just need to follow through with their thoughts.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 22, 2011, 20:52:26 pm
My 2 cents on A. Puharich work:
I seen all his interviews, who i could find. I also read all the material of the web.
If i remember right, AP wrote that it was expensive to rent the lab he used for his electrolysis process tests.
It was expensive because he needed equipment to count the electrons used in the process.
He found out that by using his blood research tools on water, that he could modify the angle of the H atoms towards the oxygen atom in a water molecule.
Now the point: He never said he had OU. His process was very efficient.
Unlike what Meyer wrote about his resonant wfc. Meyer wrote that he could see the water evaporate when his cell went into resonance...

The rumor is that AP had a motorcycle running on water and that he have been driving the thing for months....
Thats what i like... ;)

Steve

Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 22, 2011, 23:28:32 pm
In the invention, the adjustable frequency generator (Figure 12) tunes into the resonant condition of the circuit including the water cell and the water therein. The generator has a frequency capability of 0 to 10 KHz and tunes into resonance typically at a frequency of 5 KHz in a typical 3.0 inch water capacitor formed of a 0.5 inch rod enclosed within a 0.75 inch inside diameter cylinder. At start up, in this example, current draw through the water cell will measure about 25 milliamp; however, when the circuit finds a tuned resonant condition, current drops to a 1 – 2 milliamp minimum leakage condition.

the holy grail

kb
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 23, 2011, 00:15:08 am
Ok I'll drop you guys another hint...What will the difference of inductance do to the frequency that is being pulsed to the chokes?
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 23, 2011, 07:24:19 am
Hi
Quote:
the adjustable frequency generator (Figure 12) tunes into the resonant condition of the circuit.
Why not PLL circuit ( Figure 7) tune into resonant condition?
andy
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 24, 2011, 08:01:39 am
This image should tell you what is going on with the difference of inductance  ;)

(http://www.globalkast.com/images/tonywoodside/Meyer_Waveform.gif)
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 24, 2011, 10:10:58 am
Funny,

I replicated the VIC in multisim and got the same waveform as your oscopse shows with the secondary and choke coils having the same inductance. I also got a much higher voltage than the transofrmer turns ratio could give, and I got a step charging voltage across the capacitor. I understand the AC part of the waveform, but what I don't understand is the AM part, why the oscillations build up, peak, and then die down.

I'm thinking the build up is the charging of the inductor to it's peak, the dying down is the energy being dissipated?

Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 24, 2011, 19:47:59 pm
Two resonances are taking place here. 1) The smaller AM signals are to match the resonance of the electrons of the molecule. 2) The larger and slower AM signal modulates the smaller AM signals to higher voltages and what this does is setup the resonance of the Nuclear Magnetic Relaxation (NMR) cycle of the proton water which is approximately 3 secs. You can also use subharmonics of the NMR cycle which would be around 0.5 Hz & 0.25 Hz
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 24, 2011, 20:06:23 pm
T & all

observations

I've found that good inductance from the coil at resonance will show much higher peaks like your scope shot when a substantial capacitance is added parallel to the plates.  I put all the high voltage capacitors that I had on hand plus a couple of hefty tinfoil/waxed paper rolled capacitors that I made and produced almost twice the peak to peak voltage.

Lets see...  8x385v-330uf plus two 65v-50,000uf plus six 200v-1000uf plus one 150v-1400uf plus my two tinfoil caps...  a bit of added parallel capacitance wouldn't you agree?

A slight frequency adjustment to bring it all back into the highest voltage peak to peak output and you'll end just about doubling the peak to peak voltage at the same input voltage

this was obtained with a three inch bifliiar wound composite core toroid at about 10khz with 20 volts and 250ma....     2100v ptp

kb

Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 25, 2011, 00:38:39 am
T & all

observations

I've found that good inductance from the coil at resonance will show much higher peaks like your scope shot when a substantial capacitance is added parallel to the plates.  I put all the high voltage capacitors that I had on hand plus a couple of hefty tinfoil/waxed paper rolled capacitors that I made and produced almost twice the peak to peak voltage.

Lets see...  8x385v-330uf plus two 65v-50,000uf plus six 200v-1000uf plus one 150v-1400uf plus my two tinfoil caps...  a bit of added parallel capacitance wouldn't you agree?

A slight frequency adjustment to bring it all back into the highest voltage peak to peak output and you'll end just about doubling the peak to peak voltage at the same input voltage

this was obtained with a three inch bifliiar wound composite core toroid at about 10khz with 20 volts and 250ma....     2100v ptp

kb

Any gas bubles?
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 25, 2011, 01:08:18 am
Steve,

yes, slightly more gas yet I still believe it is normal electrolysis

still playing with combinations of gating lengths, pulse train lengths and such

playing is key, experimental fun is all, I'd like someone to try this and duplicate the effect, perhaps there is something to be learned here

Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 25, 2011, 08:12:53 am
KB,
I believe that you added caps will be lowering your required frequency for resonance. Also by having them there what you have done is lowered the variable % of your capacitor at production.

For example, if your cell is 3mf with water and you start production your cell could (non calculated number just an estimate) change to say 250pf thats a large change for your frequency to adjust to. Now if you put 3f worth of caps paralleled  your resting cap is 3.003f and your calculable capacitance with production is (for all intensive purposes) 3f. Not a big jump in required frequency.

The only problem with this happens when your caps start to fail due to over voltage.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 25, 2011, 18:21:46 pm
Tony, you have a very interesting theory, I have a few questions, isn't your theory saying that their is one frequency for achieving what we want? What happens when the capacitance changes and the pll changes the frequency for electrical resonance? wouldn't that mean that the circuit would no longer be providing the proper signals to effect h20 as you are proposing?
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 25, 2011, 20:07:42 pm
Two resonances are taking place here. 1) The smaller AM signals are to match the resonance of the electrons of the molecule. 2) The larger and slower AM signal modulates the smaller AM signals to higher voltages and what this does is setup the resonance of the Nuclear Magnetic Relaxation (NMR) cycle of the proton water which is approximately 3 secs. You can also use subharmonics of the NMR cycle which would be around 0.5 Hz & 0.25 Hz
@Tony
Interesting scope shot! Gives me a headache how it must be tuned on the water molecule.

@Dave
Tony pointed us to the info on the theory what mostly already written in a book.
If you read "Puharich ELF Magnetic Model of Matter and Mind" book, you can look it up too.

The interesting link Tony gave was the choke part, that also isn't written in that book. Notice that Puharich didn't label a tunable choke in the circuit.

I'm "thinking" that the frequency of the second resonance is always shifting with the first resonance but the frequencies are so high (GHz), generated from the sidebands, and do not disturb the water molecule resonance when the water dielectric properties change the first resonance.  8) The dielectric properties have most effect on the "voltage amplitude" when out of resonance it is fluctuating. But the PLL is fast enough to lock on resonance. The water molecule never sees this drift because it moves so fast. The water-gap size is fixed so only the choke and water dielectric properties could effect resonance and is adjusted by the PLL.

@All
Questions:
1) When the frequency isn't on the first resonance, is there always AM modulation signal?
2) Do we only see the step-charge signal of the second resonance which is harmonic of the first resonance, because choke inductance differences?
3) The NMR time is the second resonance which is harmonic of the first resonance time. The gate frequency is generating "resonant action" or "phonon effect" and is directly related to the size of the water-gap.
4) Sidebands (fc-sb) and (fc+sb) strength is the peak to peak difference between top and bottom sine waves in the AM wave? So what adjusts the (fc-sb) and (fc+sb) bandwidth and strength. Chokes /gate freq.?
5) Do the sidebands shift left or right width the (first resonance frequency) fc center frequency?
6) Where do we tune into, dielectric properties of water (LCL) and/or the correct amplitude and/or sideband frequency and/or water-gap size?

If someone can elaborate these questions...

Br,
Webmug
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 25, 2011, 23:21:33 pm
Well I had a guy on YouTube to answer my question correctly. HHOiseparator (http://www.youtube.com/user/HHOiseparator) answered saying, "The purpose of giving the coils of different values is to pulsed the inner and outer tube pair with different frequencies. The coil with the higher value will lower the pulsed frequency? and the coil with the lower value will higher the pulsed frequency."  There ya go! That's the answer I was looking for! =) When you pulse the LC circuit at a given frequency, the different value inductors will change the frequency to give rise to an AM wave like I have? shown in one of my videos. For example, if the circuit is pulsed at the resonant frequency of the L1 & Cell value, the frequency between L1 & the cell will be the same as the pulsed frequency. The frequency between L2 & Cell will be a different frequency from the pulsed frequency!!!
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 26, 2011, 01:13:52 am
think of this LCL circuit as a Filter circuit. You have a resonant frequency for L1 and the Cell, that will be your driving frequency. This driving frequency will be the same at the output of the L1 inductor, but the driving frequency modified by the L2 inductor to give a higher frequency. For example, Lets use Stan inductor values: L1 = 1262.7 mH, L2 = 1138 mH, and the calculated value for the cell is around 877nF. So the resonant frequency for L1 and C = 4785 Hz. This will give rise to the HV's in the LC circuit, which will modulate the signal of L2. The L2 frequency with the driving frequency of 4785 Hz will be modified to a frequency of 5038 Hz. So now you have two frequencies being applied to the cell, 4.785kHz and 5.038kHz. These two frequencies will form a Modulated AM signal.
(http://www.globalkast.com/images/tonywoodside/Modulated_AM.png)
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 26, 2011, 14:02:58 pm
@Tony
Oh my, this is great!
When SM had a threshold voltage, say. 1k5 volts and the sidebands are correct (say. fc +253Hz and fc -253Hz), then he had "resonant action" If voltage is low and side band frequency doesn't match then no "resonant action".

why?

Because just like Puharich said: when he had the voltage high enough on the device he measured high EM frequency wave from the device.
Should the high EM wave be tuned into the water-gap size? This gap size is say 2mm then the wavelength is in the GHz.
To make it more clear, it are the side band signals that generate EM waves to pull "pump" the water molecule apart and not the carrier frequency!

Also note that Keely used low freq to generate high frequency to manipulate molecular and atomic structures.

Br,
Webmug
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 26, 2011, 14:34:30 pm
Yes webmug, this is the reason for the train of impulses. Each pulse adds to the force field... And when the field collapses particle impact generate energy. The frequency is directly related to the voltage.

Tony you want every increasing amplitude not modulated. It must stop suddenly at the peak otherwise the field will counteract reducing the impact. Otherwise the only resonant action that can happen will be of the bigger ions gaining and losing electrons thru relaxation process..

Fire is a chemical laser, If you can enhance the energy of the laser by increasing the exited state, the same happens in the chemical laser medium so the gain will be in thermal explosive energy cause you cause particle impact of greater intensity. This is where the safe atomic energy can come from.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 26, 2011, 20:38:15 pm
If the capacitance value changes, then the scanning circuit will lock back on to the resonant frequency. There's a certain ratio for the inductors, so if the resonant frequency does change, the sidebands will stay constant due to the ratio. Puharich gives this ratio in his book as the 12th root of 2 ( 1.059463094 ). I've calculate Stan's inductors based on this ratio and for his capacitance of 67nF, the resonant frequency is 547 Hz with L1 = 1263.5mH and L2 = 1125.7mH....This will make the two frequencies at the cell be 547 Hz and 579.5263124 Hz....579.5263124/547 = 1.059463094.  For example, say the capacitance changes from 67nF to 60nF, the resonant frequency will now be 578 Hz... so the two frequencies will be changed to 578 Hz and 612.71 Hz....578/612.71..Hz = 1.059463094...So the ratio for the sidebands will stay constant.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 26, 2011, 23:23:08 pm
If the capacitance value changes, then the scanning circuit will lock back on to the resonant frequency. There's a certain ratio for the inductors, so if the resonant frequency does change, the sidebands will stay constant due to the ratio. Puharich gives this ratio in his book as the 12th root of 2 ( 1.059463094 ). I've calculate Stan's inductors based on this ratio and for his capacitance of 67nF, the resonant frequency is 547 Hz with L1 = 1263.5mH and L2 = 1125.7mH....This will make the two frequencies at the cell be 547 Hz and 579.5263124 Hz....579.5263124/547 = 1.059463094.  For example, say the capacitance changes from 67nF to 60nF, the resonant frequency will now be 578 Hz... so the two frequencies will be changed to 578 Hz and 612.71 Hz....578/612.71..Hz = 1.059463094...So the ratio for the sidebands will stay constant.
So if we use this 12th root of 2 ratio between chokes we can always "tune in" the structure of the water molecule (phonon vibrations between four vertices) because of the side band results on the center frequency.

The LCL circuit should give high voltage on resonance and the side band is tuned (12th root of 2 ratio) with L1 and L2 chokes.

Looks like we redefined SM his famous words: "tuning into the dielectric properties of water"?

Br,
Webmug
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 27, 2011, 12:21:41 pm
@Tony,
What frequency are you going for?

Keely:
"In molecular dissociation one fork of 620 is used, setting the chords on the first octave.
Go for resonance frequency 620Hz and ratio 2^(1/12) = 656.8Hz; C=52.141nF; L1=1263.5mH and L2=1125.7mH

What is the bandwidth for molecular dissociation (620Hz)

Puharich calculated 657.4Hz and called it "beat" effect. I assume it depends on what type of water is used.

Also can you elaborate how the AM signal is generated for the first resonance (PULSE and GATE).
Is the gate frequency adjusted on 3sec time that corresponds to the nuclear spin relaxation time, tau/sec, of the water?

Br,
Webmug
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 27, 2011, 15:06:08 pm
I`m confused here! how did you guys came up with the 67n 60n 52n. They all seem to be very high values for the water capacitor we are using. Are you assuming this value for only one 3inch tube set?

[/size]hm

Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 27, 2011, 15:28:39 pm
@Tony,
What frequency are you going for?

Keely:
"In molecular dissociation one fork of 620 is used, setting the chords on the first octave.
Go for resonance frequency 620Hz and ratio 2^(1/12) = 656.8Hz; C=52.141nF; L1=1263.5mH and L2=1125.7mH

What is the bandwidth for molecular dissociation (620Hz)

Puharich calculated 657.4Hz and called it "beat" effect. I assume it depends on what type of water is used.

Also can you elaborate how the AM signal is generated for the first resonance (PULSE and GATE).
Is the gate frequency adjusted on 3sec time that corresponds to the nuclear spin relaxation time, tau/sec, of the water?

Br,
Webmug

Yea the AM signal is also known as a "Beat" effect. http://www.walter-fendt.de/ph14e/beats.htm (http://www.walter-fendt.de/ph14e/beats.htm)  Yea I think the gate is to be adjusted to the NMR of water as Puharich and Meyer both say 0.5 Hz. You can think of these AM signals acting as particle wave dualities.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 27, 2011, 15:33:36 pm
I`m confused here! how did you guys came up with the 67n 60n 52n. They all seem to be very high values for the water capacitor we are using. Are you assuming this value for only one 3inch tube set?

hm

The calculated value for the cell will be much different from the actual measured value. Like for Stan's resonant cavity, the tubes calculated capacitance is around 877pF, but the measured value for a single tube with distilled water is 670nF. Since Meyer had 10 tubes wired in series you will have a capacitance of around 67nF, but you can get the value lower by circulating the water through the tubes.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 27, 2011, 16:27:33 pm
I`m confused here! how did you guys came up with the 67n 60n 52n. They all seem to be very high values for the water capacitor we are using. Are you assuming this value for only one 3inch tube set?

hm

The calculated value for the cell will be much different from the actual measured value. Like for Stan's resonant cavity, the tubes calculated capacitance is around 877pF, but the measured value for a single tube with distilled water is 670nF. Since Meyer had 10 tubes wired in series you will have a capacitance of around 67nF, but you can get the value lower by circulating the water through the tubes.

Does it have the right frequency if we use one cell or do we need 10 to match the frequency?
Why did SM build all the 11 VIC coils and circuits if he used 1 VIC and circuit and 10 wfc cells in series?

Big question is how to correctly measure and calculate this capacitance of the cell.

If we look for measurements we see in the table different measurement frequencies at 100Hz,120Hz,1kHz and 10kHz and the capacitance.
We notice in air (empty) that the cell has almost constant capacitance of 21pF.

Now if we go for tap water we see on low frequency higher capacitance and high frequency lower capacitance, so not constant!
The capacitance is changing when the frequency is changing.  When we want 600Hz for resonance there is a capacitance value at this frequency and it depends on the used water-type and cell construction.

Can we make a function (guessing; exponential) for capacitance values and frequency for calculations?

Br,
Webmug
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 27, 2011, 17:29:36 pm
would it be possible to put 9 high voltage caps in series with the water cap? And even if we use a single cell everything should still work correctly according to you theory? it would just resonate at a lower frequency?
and for the capacitance, Tony are you saying the measured capacitance is correct and the calculated cap is wrong? Maybe someone has the ability to measure capacitance at any frequency? we could put together a spreadsheet or we could do what webmug suggests
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 27, 2011, 21:21:40 pm
Yes webmug, this is the reason for the train of impulses. Each pulse adds to the force field... And when the field collapses particle impact generate energy. The frequency is directly related to the voltage.
Does this AM also work to make the "steam resonator" but on different frequency as the "resonant wfc"?
As we shake the molecule on a different frequency and not pump it up too much, it heats up.

Br,
Webmug
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 28, 2011, 04:08:17 am
yea I also think this works for the steam resonator as well. It just operates at a different frequency as not to split the molecule but rather oscillate it back and forth from one surface to the other, much like AC power does to water.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 28, 2011, 04:14:16 am
I have a VIC circuit that I'm selling at a discounted price due an imperfection on the board. I screwed up and installed a regulator backwards and while I was removing the regulator I pulled one of the traces up, but it didn't break of anything. I super glued it back down to the board and can't sale it as new, so rather than throwing it away I figured I would just sell it at a discounted price of \$200 shipped. I have tested it and it works fine, just the small imperfection. If interested send me an email to tonywoodside@gmail.com  Here are some images of the section of the board.
(http://www.globalkast.com/images/tonywoodside/discounted-1.JPG)

(http://www.globalkast.com/images/tonywoodside/discounted-2.JPG)

(http://www.globalkast.com/images/tonywoodside/discounted-3.JPG)

(http://www.globalkast.com/images/tonywoodside/discounted-4.JPG)

(http://www.globalkast.com/images/tonywoodside/discounted-5.JPG)

Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 28, 2011, 08:39:19 am

I`m guessing that he wired the 10 small cells in series so to have the most surface area possible with the lowest capacitance value.

Why did SM build all the 11 VIC coils and circuits if he used 1 VIC and circuit and 10 wfc cells in series?

That`s a million dollar question Webmug!

Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 28, 2011, 08:47:14 am
The best answer I can give you for this is that Stan originally had issues with the capacitance for each tube as the water temp changed from the weather. So in the end he connected all the tubes in series in order to 1) Lower the capacitance value. 2) By them being in series it would keep an almost constant capacitance value if the temp changed. The deviation of changing capacitance would be that great due to the 1/10 tube value change.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 28, 2011, 09:18:53 am
Hey Tony,
Do you think that it is still possible to tune into the molecule and split water with only one tube set ? or does we need a lower capacitance cell combination and different frequencies ?

HM
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 28, 2011, 17:22:12 pm
yea I think we need the low capacitance in order to get this to work so that we get the right frequencies.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 29, 2011, 16:39:43 pm
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 29, 2011, 18:37:54 pm
Series Connected Capacitors.

This changed the game play a bit, so lets look at what it really changes. The charging current (ic) flowing through the capacitors is THE SAME for all capacitors as it only has one path to follow and iT = i1 = i2 = i3 etc. Then, Capacitors in Series all have the same current so each capacitor stores the same amount of charge regardless of its capacitance. This is because the charge stored by an electrode of any one capacitor must have come from the electrode of its adjacent capacitor, therefor
Quote
QT = Q1 = Q2 = Q3 .... ETC
In the following circuit, capacitors, C1, C2 and C3 are all connected together in a series branch between point A and B
Between point A and B, we have;

C1 = 0.1uF (VC1)
C2 = 0.2uF (VC2)
C3 = 0.3uF (VC3)
VAB = 12V (the over all voltage charge)

In a parallel circuit, what we thought Meyer had, the total capacitance, CT of the circuit was equal to the sum of all the individual capacitors added together. In a series connected circuit however, the total or equal capacitance CT is calculated differently. The voltage drop across each capacitor will be different depending upon the values of the individual capacitance - )we should see or measure the same if all the individual cells are made in the same manor) -  Then by adding Kirchoff's Voltage Law (KVL) to the above circuit, we get;
Quote
VAB = VC1 + VC2 + VC3 = 12V
Kirchoff's Voltage Law (KVL)
This law is also called Kirchoff's second law, Kirchoff's loop (mesh) rule. The principle of conservation of energy implies that; The direct sum of the electrical potential differences (voltage) around any closed circuit is zero OR More simply, the sum of the emfs in any closed loop is equivalent to the sum of the potential drop in that loop OR The algebraic sum of the products of the resistance of the conductors and the currents in them in a closed loop is equal to the total emf available in that loop. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirchhoff%27s_circuit_laws#Kirchhoff.27s_voltage_law_.28KVL.29 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirchhoff%27s_circuit_laws#Kirchhoff.27s_voltage_law_.28KVL.29)
Quote
VAB = VC1 + VC2 + VC3 = 12V
VC1 = QT /C1 - VC2 = QT / C2 - VC3 = QT / C3

Since Q = CV or V = Q/C, substituting Q/C for each capacitors voltage VC in the above KVL equation gives us:
Quote
VAB = QT/CT = QT/C1 + QT/C2 + QT/C3

Dividing each term through by Q gives:
Quote

Series Capacitance Equation
CT = (1/C1) + (1/C2) + (1/C3) + ... etc

When adding together capacitors in series, the reciprocal (1/C) of the individual capacitors are all added together (just like resistors in parallel) instead of the capacitance's themselves. Then the total value for the capacitors in series equals the reciprocal of the sum of the reciprocal of the individual capacitance's.

Example;
Using Tony's number of 67nF over a single capacitor for a 10 capacitor cell:

1/CT =(1/67) = 0.014925 x 10 = 1/0,14925 = 6,7nF

So we now all of a sudden only have 1/10'th of the initial capacitance. One important point to remember about capacitors connected in series is that the total capacitance (CT) of any number of capacitors connected together in series will ALWAYS BE LESS then the value of the smallest capacitor in the series and in our case CT = 6,7nF where's one capacitor is 67nF

Adding cell's will of course lower the capacitance. If we had 20 capacitors, the number will only be 3,35nF

You can check the capacitance value for your cell's here: http://www.csgnetwork.com/seriescapacicalc.html (http://www.csgnetwork.com/seriescapacicalc.html)
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 29, 2011, 22:40:03 pm
Thanks for sharing this video of the effect, Tony!!!  :)

I have it also running in my simulator now. The voltage is growing fast peak to peak from L1 at resonance.
How high is this voltage generated in the real L1 inductor, you said you generated about 4kV? That's enough I think.
Keep it below the max. range of the wire specs I assume.

Have you measured the frequency from your pickup coil on your scope? I was wondering how it looks like?

Great!

Br,
Webmug
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 30, 2011, 12:36:32 pm
Getting back to the 12th root of 2 ratio, ... do you guys know that in music the 12th root of 2 ratio is exactly the difference between two notes! E.g., an A has a frequency of 440Hz, the next higher note is the Ais which is 466.16 Hz, the difference between that is exactly the 12th root of 2 or 1,05946309. This is the same for all subsequent notes. So does this mean that it has to do something with the sound wave created in the cavity as well?

Sharky
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 30, 2011, 17:12:38 pm
Getting back to the 12th root of 2 ratio, ... do you guys know that in music the 12th root of 2 ratio is exactly the difference between two notes! E.g., an A has a frequency of 440Hz, the next higher note is the Ais which is 466.16 Hz, the difference between that is exactly the 12th root of 2 or 1,05946309. This is the same for all subsequent notes. So does this mean that it has to do something with the sound wave created in the cavity as well?

Sharky
It all has to do with sound waves "vibrations" in the cavity.

Check attachment "Music of the Molecule" pdf

Br,
Webmug
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 30, 2011, 18:54:18 pm
Yea Puharich gives these overtones and such.

(http://www.globalkast.com/images/tonywoodside/ap_freq_diagram1.GIF)

(http://www.globalkast.com/images/tonywoodside/AP_Overtones.PNG)
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 30, 2011, 19:52:12 pm
(http://www.globalkast.com/images/tonywoodside/AP_Overtones.PNG)
I'm not a musician so my knowledge is limited.

Notice the frequency's in the Octave (ratio 2:1) from 360Hz (D = 360Hz) (+deltaOmega)
360.00 x (12th root of 2) = 381.40Hz (384Hz)
381.40 x (12th root of 2) = 404.08Hz (400Hz) (E = 405Hz)
404.08 x (12th root of 2) = 428.11Hz (432Hz)
428.11 x (12th root of 2) = 453.57Hz (450Hz)
453.57 x (12th root of 2) = 480.54Hz (480Hz) (G = 480Hz)
480.54 x (12th root of 2) = 509.11Hz
509.11 x (12th root of 2) = 539.39Hz (540Hz) (A = 540Hz)
539.39 x (12th root of 2) = 571.46Hz (576Hz)
571.46 x (12th root of 2) = 605.44Hz (600Hz) (f0=600Hz=Omega.r
605.44 x (12th root of 2) = 641.44Hz (648Hz) (C = 640Hz)
641.44 x (12th root of 2) = 679.58Hz (675Hz)
679.58 x (12th root of 2) = 720.00Hz (720Hz) (D = 720Hz) (-deltaOmega)

Keely mentions a so called "pitch" between two oscillating Atoms. The pitch is the vibration of frequency between them.
The oscillations of an atom has a very high frequency, but the "pitch" frequency is very low (differences between them).
If we vibrate (give impulses) on that frequency we can change the oscillation of the Atom and make it unstable.

Br,
Webmug
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 31, 2011, 17:58:57 pm
According to Don's messurement, the electrode distance is 2,413 (or 0.095") mm for the latest cell. Frequensy responce is 3610.5263Hz (3,61kHz) at that distance - to match the 3.98kHz from Puharich, we need the electrode distance to be 0.086" or 2.1844 mm electrode distance.

An electrode distance of 1.5 mm or 0.059 inch equals 5813.5593Hz (5.81kHz)
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 31, 2011, 18:05:04 pm
According to Don's messurement, the electrode distance is 2,413 (or 0.095") mm for the latest cell. Frequensy responce is 3610.5263Hz (3,61kHz) at that distance - to match the 3.98kHz from Puharich, we need the electrode distance to be 0.086" or 2.1844 mm electrode distance.
How did you calculate this, can you elaborate? Isn't that water-gap in the GHz frequency range?
Also the value of 0.090" showed up in the patents.

Br,
Webmug
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 31, 2011, 18:09:11 pm
Quote
How did you calculate this, can you elaborate? Isn't that water-gap in the GHz frequency range?
Also the value of 0.090" showed up in the patents.

Br,
Webmug

You can go to this site or do it manually. http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-wavelength.htm (http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-wavelength.htm)

0.090" = 3811.1Hz
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 31, 2011, 18:12:54 pm
I will see if I can change the speed of sound to match that in water
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 31, 2011, 19:48:02 pm
The speed of sound through water is 1482 m/s and with a gap of 0.095" = 614173.23 Hz.  Based on Don's measurements this is what I drew up in autocad and it give a distance between the inner and outer electrode as 0.095"

(http://www.globalkast.com/images/stanmeyer/Resonant_Cavity_Tube_Measurements.png)
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 31, 2011, 20:25:42 pm

I changed the speed to match water, but that reply did not make it through, so an empty reply - I also did this one; To match one of Puharich Harmonic Oscillation Wave Function of 15.95kHz - we need an electrode distance of 0.0938" - this is one of the matches we get with sound through water, so frequensy would be 15959.4883Hz. 61.41KHz is not a match to 63.68kHz that you quoted earlier - the 2,27kHz differance, is that somehow changed in the frequency generator... so as long as the gap is closely matched, we can tune in?
This is quite interesting. We also know one other important thing, Meyer used flowing water in his cell - in regards to electrode distance and frequency, I think this should be considered. Flowing water will surly not be the same as still water in regards to speed of sound.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on August 01, 2011, 16:31:48 pm
Okay, here is a question. Stanley used a solid rod as a cathode, and so far, we've narrowed it down that that the harmonic frequency are related to the chokes and also the electrode gap - a match in the electrode gap and chokes = resonance as long as you start of with the correct input. Now, during all these years that I've been working on this, sometimes someone pops up and say - hey, you need the tubes to ring at the resonance frequency and you need to tune them.. hmm, well, yes, for the old system yes. It should be quite clear by now that what Stanley did was TUNING in his old system, that is why he built them. I recon he had a fairly good understanding of what he needed (if we look at the system from the start till the end) and all he did was tune and adjust, and that is the reason for all the versions.

So, now we are @ the last 3" cell (well, its actually 2,5") and remarks about the 0.095" gap was made. Which got me thinking, so back to the cathode.

We have voltage that perform work and we want to isolate this area, so we insulate the capacitor. We then have resonance that stretch the molecule, you create a Rydberg Molecule (partial ionization) and this is happening with sound waves within the medium. All of this is doable. First of all - the charge is on the electrode surface and in the medium, essentially making the material good for two things 1) Transport the current to the surface. 2) Transport the harmonic oscillation frequency's to the charging medium. It seams like its not used - anymore - as the oscillator itself (the electrodes). Now, correct me if I am wrong or you have another theory, that is why we are all here. So, as I said, all of this got me thinking.

The electrodes now got a dedicated job, and stainless is used to prevent oxidation. But why do we need a solid metal rod as the cathode? We know that we do not want or need water there, but could we not simply go for a solution where the cathode also is a tube and close it off, lets say with a Delrin or Teflon rod? Or is a solid metal rod needed in the sense that it actually is part of the harmonic frequency creation ??
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on August 01, 2011, 17:26:59 pm
Okay, here is a question. Stanley used a solid rod as a cathode, and so far, we've narrowed it down that that the harmonic frequency are related to the chokes and also the electrode gap - a match in the electrode gap and chokes = resonance as long as you start of with the correct input. Now, during all these years that I've been working on this, sometimes someone pops up and say - hey, you need the tubes to ring at the resonance frequency and you need to tune them.. hmm, well, yes, for the old system yes. It should be quite clear by now that what Stanley did was TUNING in his old system, that is why he built them. I recon he had a fairly good understanding of what he needed (if we look at the system from the start till the end) and all he did was tune and adjust, and that is the reason for all the versions.

So, now we are @ the last 3" cell (well, its actually 2,5") and remarks about the 0.095" gap was made. Which got me thinking, so back to the cathode.

We have voltage that perform work and we want to isolate this area, so we insulate the capacitor. We then have resonance that stretch the molecule, you create a Rydberg Molecule (partial ionization) and this is happening with sound waves within the medium. All of this is doable. First of all - the charge is on the electrode surface and in the medium, essentially making the material good for two things 1) Transport the current to the surface. 2) Transport the harmonic oscillation frequency's to the charging medium. It seams like its not used - anymore - as the oscillator itself (the electrodes). Now, correct me if I am wrong or you have another theory, that is why we are all here. So, as I said, all of this got me thinking.

The electrodes now got a dedicated job, and stainless is used to prevent oxidation. But why do we need a solid metal rod as the cathode? We know that we do not want or need water there, but could we not simply go for a solution where the cathode also is a tube and close it off, lets say with a Delrin or Teflon rod? Or is a solid metal rod needed in the sense that it actually is part of the harmonic frequency creation ??
What I think: the Rod is a KISS approach, mechanical solution for fixing it in a Delrin cavity.

Quote
Tony:"The speed of sound through water is 1482 m/s and with a gap of 0.095" = 614173.23 Hz."

Iontruster:"Frequency response is 3610.5263Hz (3,61kHz) at that distance"
Still I have not a clue, how you came up with the gap frequency for 0.0950" in the kHz range?

Br,
Webmug
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on August 02, 2011, 08:26:57 am
According to this wavelength calculator for Audio Sound Frequency, the wavelength for a gap of 0.095" through water (1482 m/s) is 614173.2283 Hz (approx. 614kHz).  http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-wavelength.htm
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on August 02, 2011, 08:56:54 am
Isn't that the wavelength of just one fundamental tone? See this website http://media.paisley.ac.uk/~davison/labpage/tube/tube.html (http://media.paisley.ac.uk/~davison/labpage/tube/tube.html) for more information on sound resonance in a open tube. Based on your fundamental wavelength you can calculate the overtone wavelengths based on the tube length. You will get audio resonance at a lot of different frequencies.
Regards,
Sharky
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on August 02, 2011, 10:06:32 am
Okay, here is a question. Stanley used a solid rod as a cathode, and so far, we've narrowed it down that that the harmonic frequency are related to the chokes and also the electrode gap - a match in the electrode gap and chokes = resonance as long as you start of with the correct input. Now, during all these years that I've been working on this, sometimes someone pops up and say - hey, you need the tubes to ring at the resonance frequency and you need to tune them.. hmm, well, yes, for the old system yes. It should be quite clear by now that what Stanley did was TUNING in his old system, that is why he built them. I recon he had a fairly good understanding of what he needed (if we look at the system from the start till the end) and all he did was tune and adjust, and that is the reason for all the versions.

So, now we are @ the last 3" cell (well, its actually 2,5") and remarks about the 0.095" gap was made. Which got me thinking, so back to the cathode.

We have voltage that perform work and we want to isolate this area, so we insulate the capacitor. We then have resonance that stretch the molecule, you create a Rydberg Molecule (partial ionization) and this is happening with sound waves within the medium. All of this is doable. First of all - the charge is on the electrode surface and in the medium, essentially making the material good for two things 1) Transport the current to the surface. 2) Transport the harmonic oscillation frequency's to the charging medium. It seams like its not used - anymore - as the oscillator itself (the electrodes). Now, correct me if I am wrong or you have another theory, that is why we are all here. So, as I said, all of this got me thinking.

The electrodes now got a dedicated job, and stainless is used to prevent oxidation. But why do we need a solid metal rod as the cathode? We know that we do not want or need water there, but could we not simply go for a solution where the cathode also is a tube and close it off, lets say with a Delrin or Teflon rod? Or is a solid metal rod needed in the sense that it actually is part of the harmonic frequency creation ??

My 2 cents are also that the choice for a solid rod is a mechanical one and has nothing to do with anything else.
The gap stays the same between the 2 electrodes.
Surface square mm stay the same.
And no water inside the inner one. No electron leakage so to speak.
So, resonance at the end must be an electrical one. No sounds waves in my opinion....

Steve

Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on August 03, 2011, 20:29:47 pm
There is a solution to "power and torque." This was worked out (maybe for the first time in the public) in 2009 and early 2010. I've mentioned it before here and also on other open groups. Not everyone agree, and is not required, but if you missed the PDF I did and posted, here is a new chance. What one must remember or understand, is that pooling away electrons and creation of ionic states also require that you add the same quantity back when you want molecular and atomic formation. There is no magic, only science. The interaction of scalar-waves and energy from the vacuum within Meyers cell is not proven scientifically - yet.

http://www.ionizationx.com/index.php/topic,1251.msg20659.html#msg20659 (http://www.ionizationx.com/index.php/topic,1251.msg20659.html#msg20659)
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on August 03, 2011, 22:30:37 pm
Cool!(pun intended)

I do see where you are going with this Steve, and I think it could be a good view of it all. It could work with enough compression and heat. But with plain HHO, we have more of a problem of generating enough heat. How can we fix that problem? Pre-combustion fuel ionization?

You see, even with electrolysis, I always found it wasn't that hard to produce enough HHO to run a motor. It was never an issue of quantity, it was more about torque and power. Which keeps driving me back to why it is paramount that electrons are "extracted" from the fuel mixture. It blatantly seems obvious to me, that the only way this could be a possibilty, would be to harness the atomic energy of the atoms. Like snapping a tiny atomic rubber band!

So, could it be that simply making an "electron extraction" device could do the trick? Can we easily make the incoming air electron deficient? How will the the positively charged air react with HHO and water?

First, i think your reaction is on the wrong topic?
Should i move it?

Secondly, i have been involved in that discussion on Aarons forum about creating ammonia out of hho and air.
Edward Mitchel aka h2opower was a member here as well.
Oneminds text also speaks lots of sense.
However, nobody confirmed anything from testing, except me.
I do hope that we get one day more testers.

Again, i can confirm that an ionizer of ambient air does add power and torq.
Did that with my motorbike, running on hho only.

I havent test the ionizer with after that some kind of EEC.
But i have seen interesting effects of ionizing air......

Thats what Meyer did.
And it works.
I havent had the plesure to add waterdrops in the same tests....
The bike is gone. Only motor left here is a small power genset.
But doesnt run so well as a 4 cylinder bike engine.
Again a budget issue.

Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on August 03, 2011, 22:45:05 pm
I just noticed something about a drawing I was looking at for an illustration. The way that it is drawn is confusing, making it look connected where it shouldn't be. I took the liberty of dividing the two, have a look...

The fist image is correct. The exhaust and ionized gases are mixed with water in the chamber and then sent through a check valve and on to the injectors.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on August 04, 2011, 02:52:08 am
Sorry, wrong thread... I removed the posts.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on August 12, 2011, 02:01:30 am
I think we should build a working vic first:  ;D

• Ionizationx: water as fuel »
• Stanley Meyer non electrolysis waterfuel systems »
• Stan Meyers system 3 »
• How to build the vic tried and tested
•

• Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on August 12, 2011, 02:36:18 am
already have a working VIC and thats what this thread is about is the signal that I'm getting from the VIC Transformer.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on August 12, 2011, 03:01:25 am
thats cool  ;D

Well anything other than a squarewave in gives poor results, you get a squarewave out, more or less, with a squarewave in, i would say the potential difference out is the same as any normal transformer as far as i can tell.

Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on August 12, 2011, 05:57:52 am
In this setup a square wave in will not give u a square wave out. The VIC Transformer has a 7:1 step-up ratio and by the L1 & L2 coils being out of phase, this will make the signals 180 degrees out of phase. L1 & L2 coils also have different inductance values and when they are used with a cell capacitor, they will form a circuit similar to a Band Pass Filter circuit. L1 with the cell will act as a Low Pass filter and L2 with the cell will act as a High Pass filter.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on August 23, 2011, 15:23:55 pm
feature=share

Thumbs up  8)

Combine it with AM signal and growing AM "beat" and we almost have it just like SM explained.
Puharich figure shows half-wave AM, look familiar? Also looks like step-charge with the beat?

Br,
Webmug
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on August 24, 2011, 03:37:04 am
a question: In the circuit design of the 8xa board, I notice it relies upon a mains supply, thus are part of the frequencies used in the circuit dependant upon the mains supply frequency?

If so, to construct a circuit design that is run off a vehicle dc supply, what would be suggested as a stable signal/frequency generator ?

thanks
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on August 25, 2011, 21:19:26 pm
According to Keely the molecule will maintain its integrity (steady state: state of relative harmony ratio 1:1:1) until the ratio of width to length exceeds 1:4 at which point the molecule disrupts or comes apart forming a dipole and a monopole particles. Implying the molecule can not separate into three distinct particles at one time. Because to do so would mean that as they got further and further apart approaching the 1:4 ratio its confines of ratio would be held in strict relativity - i.e., as the molecule stretched the ratios would remain relative to one another. This scenario is interesting in that a molecule could be made to stretch in all three directions artificially. Once it reached a point where all three diameters exceeded the original 1:4 ratio two frequencies could be quickly demodulated such that they instantly revert to the original rates thus leaving one of them at the 4+ ratio. The molecule would instantly disrupt with little apparent energy input. In other words, the molecule could be stimulated until it was in a state of maximum instability and then "nudged" into dissociation with a small tickle of force.

Planck's constant, is a physical constant reflecting the sizes of quanta in quantum mechanics. The Planck constant was first described as the proportionality constant between the energy (E) of a photon and the frequency of its associated electromagnetic wave (?).
The Planck constant is a fixed amount of energy being the difference of energy quantities as measured from orbital shell to orbital shell or from one energy state to another. The Planck constant is the difference between the energy levels. This difference is the same as the interval as spoken of in music.

A semitone is the smallest change of pitch (frequency) used in conventional music and musical notation. Semitones correspond with the individual keys of a tuned piano. A semitone is defined as the "12th root of 2" (1.05946...).   The Golden Ratio (1.61803...) when cubed, almost exactly equals 25 semitones. Therefore the 25th root of a cubed golden ratio (1.05945...) equals 0.99998... semitones. This difference, when accumulated over the entire range of human hearing (about 120 semitones) is less than 3.5/100 of one semitone, and is undetectable by the human ear.

It is assumed the natural progression of discord follows the following pattern of ratios from perfect harmony or equation of forces to the least harmonious or the point of disruption:

Harmony 1:1:1 / 1:1:2 / 1:2:2 / 1:2:3 / 1:3:5 Disruption

The above figures are the natural progression of the Fibonacci spiral and all other life activities resulting from a natural progression of events.
They are intimately connected with the golden ratio, for example the closest rational approximations to the ratio are 2/1, 3/2, 5/3, 8/5, ...

So the ratio Puharich found (also valid for water molecules) was "12th root of 2" and is tightly coupled to Keely's work.

Br,
Webmug
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on August 27, 2011, 06:19:58 am
According to Keely the molecule will maintain its integrity (steady state: state of relative harmony ratio 1:1:1) until the ratio of width to length exceeds 1:4 at which point the molecule disrupts or comes apart forming a dipole and a monopole particles. Implying the molecule can not separate into three distinct particles at one time. Because to do so would mean that as they got further and further apart approaching the 1:4 ratio its confines of ratio would be held in strict relativity - i.e., as the molecule stretched the ratios would remain relative to one another. This scenario is interesting in that a molecule could be made to stretch in all three directions artificially. Once it reached a point where all three diameters exceeded the original 1:4 ratio two frequencies could be quickly demodulated such that they instantly revert to the original rates thus leaving one of them at the 4+ ratio. The molecule would instantly disrupt with little apparent energy input. In other words, the molecule could be stimulated until it was in a state of maximum instability and then "nudged" into dissociation with a small tickle of force.

Planck's constant, is a physical constant reflecting the sizes of quanta in quantum mechanics. The Planck constant was first described as the proportionality constant between the energy (E) of a photon and the frequency of its associated electromagnetic wave (?).
The Planck constant is a fixed amount of energy being the difference of energy quantities as measured from orbital shell to orbital shell or from one energy state to another. The Planck constant is the difference between the energy levels. This difference is the same as the interval as spoken of in music.

A semitone is the smallest change of pitch (frequency) used in conventional music and musical notation. Semitones correspond with the individual keys of a tuned piano. A semitone is defined as the "12th root of 2" (1.05946...).   The Golden Ratio (1.61803...) when cubed, almost exactly equals 25 semitones. Therefore the 25th root of a cubed golden ratio (1.05945...) equals 0.99998... semitones. This difference, when accumulated over the entire range of human hearing (about 120 semitones) is less than 3.5/100 of one semitone, and is undetectable by the human ear.

It is assumed the natural progression of discord follows the following pattern of ratios from perfect harmony or equation of forces to the least harmonious or the point of disruption:

Harmony 1:1:1 / 1:1:2 / 1:2:2 / 1:2:3 / 1:3:5 Disruption

The above figures are the natural progression of the Fibonacci spiral and all other life activities resulting from a natural progression of events.
They are intimately connected with the golden ratio, for example the closest rational approximations to the ratio are 2/1, 3/2, 5/3, 8/5, ...

So the ratio Puharich found (also valid for water molecules) was "12th root of 2" and is tightly coupled to Keely's work.

Br,
Webmug

This sounds very close to the work Alex Petty has posted on his site.

AlexPetty.com (http://www.alexpetty.com/)

I would also like to add something that may be useful to this thread. Please correct me if I am wrong. Plank's constant is a purely emperical quantized value of light information that was derived by the steel industry scientists and Plank to describe the photo electric effect. It worked wonderfully and Einstein won the Nobel for it. Plank went to his grave searching for a traditional framework to describe the constant and Einstein hated it. Frank Znidarsic has published papers that can now properly express Plank's constant as Velocity = frequency X Wavelength through a traditional classical framework using high school level algebra.

The Control of the Natural Forces (http://academic.research.microsoft.com/Publication/10755558/the-control-of-the-natural-forces)

This is a Quote by AlienScientist describing Frank Znidarsic's paper The Control of the Natural Forces.
Quote
Now to the paper.
(Go to equation 4.)
Coulomb described the electrical force with his constants Q etc. and variable radius “r”. Znidarsic rearranged the constants in the form of the elastic energy of a spring.
together they equal a group constant K. The variable 1/r remains the same.
Amazingly, the new form revealed the classical radius of the electron “2rp”. However, that’s not nearly as important as what else he discovered… The mechanical elastic constant and displacement 2rp can be used to determine the velocity of sound within the electron.
You see, the strength of the electric field varies with distance r away from the electron and this is reflected in this variable elastic constant. The speed of sound also varies at different locations within the electron.
(Go to equation 4).
The velocity 1 million meters per second was then written in terms of a product of frequency and wavelength. Znidarsic assumed that this was the velocity of light within these experiments.
(Now onto eq. 10:)
The condition of the velocity of light (left side) was set equal to the condition produced by the velocity of sound (right side). The velocity of a wave in medium is determined by the stiffness of that medium. (Show waves going at different velocities). The greater the strength of the forces within the medium, the faster the wave propagates. This is why sound travels faster in steel than in water. In the case where all the waves are going at the same velocity the strength of the forces between the components is the same. This implies that the strength of the electromagnetic, gravitomagentic, and nuclear forces converge under this condition.

This discovery has important technical ramifications. It shows the conditions necessary to control the natural forces. As in, controlling Gravity and Nuclear Forces.
This idea does not end in the clouds, however, it can also be used to produce the structure of the hydrogen atom (in equation #12.) This has never been done before from a classical premise.
Not only that, but the structure was extended to produced the intensity of spectral emission.
Finally, if you set rx equal to the radius of the hydrogen atom. The elastic energy contained by an elastic discontinuity of displacement 2rp equals the zero point kinetic energy of the ground state electron. Frank suggests that the natural force fields are pinned into the structure of matter at this discontinuity. The transitional quantum state removes the discontinuity and releases the fields.

The question is can this information help us better understand how Stan Meyers was economically splitting the water molecule? Frank Znidarsic was an electrical engineer that for years calculated the impedance between megawatt power stations and residential power grids. It was this insight into the understanding of impedance matching for efficient energy transfer that clued him in to the speed of the quantum transition. Please tell me how this information is not some how critical to the understanding of how the water fuel cell actually works at the quantum level.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on August 27, 2011, 06:29:39 am
Yea I think Frank's info is very important with Stan's WFC. I've been in contact with Frank to see if he can help with this and he told me that the closest that he has seen to Stan's replication is Rossi. Frank has also seen a common occurrence with other works such as cold fusion where a certain value keeps coming up. The value he keeps seeing in all these phenomenons is that they all are related to 1,000,000 m/sec. I find that pretty interesting.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on August 27, 2011, 07:48:28 am
so if the science between the waveform driving the VIC, the VIC construction and cell construction parameters can be accurately worked out then its plausible that all ofthe waveform driving side could be replaced with a smaller microprocessor board design?
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 03, 2011, 15:29:05 pm
According to Keely the molecule will maintain its integrity (steady state: state of relative harmony ratio 1:1:1) until the ratio of width to length exceeds 1:4 at which point the molecule disrupts or comes apart forming a dipole and a monopole particles. Implying the molecule can not separate into three distinct particles at one time. Because to do so would mean that as they got further and further apart approaching the 1:4 ratio its confines of ratio would be held in strict relativity - i.e., as the molecule stretched the ratios would remain relative to one another. This scenario is interesting in that a molecule could be made to stretch in all three directions artificially. Once it reached a point where all three diameters exceeded the original 1:4 ratio two frequencies could be quickly demodulated such that they instantly revert to the original rates thus leaving one of them at the 4+ ratio. The molecule would instantly disrupt with little apparent energy input. In other words, the molecule could be stimulated until it was in a state of maximum instability and then "nudged" into dissociation with a small tickle of force.
Keely gives frequencies for molecule manipulation and starting the oscillation of the molecule with three frequencies, called Thirds! Also he has more higher ones (Sixths, etc just like SM did for the gas-processor: Atomic Hydrogen etc.), but the Third is still a misery using SM setup for starting to grasp the electrical polarization process (molecular dissociation).

We know we now use two for frequencies in the SM resonance setup, namely the two choke frequencies. What is the other frequency? NMR?
The signal generated for two sine-wave signals intermixed is called Amplitude Modulation.  When we mix the third frequency it is still looks like Amplitude Modulated, but now there are more dynamics in this signal going into a cavity.
The dynamic AM signal has more ingredients for the manipulation of the molecule inaudible for the human ear!

SM knew exactly what Keely has written for using Thirds and Sixths etc! Look at the diagram for the similar drawings according to Stan and Keely.

Br,
Webmug
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on December 20, 2011, 21:25:40 pm
think of this LCL circuit as a Filter circuit. You have a resonant frequency for L1 and the Cell, that will be your driving frequency. This driving frequency will be the same at the output of the L1 inductor, but the driving frequency modified by the L2 inductor to give a higher frequency. For example, Lets use Stan inductor values: L1 = 1262.7 mH, L2 = 1138 mH, and the calculated value for the cell is around 877nF. So the resonant frequency for L1 and C = 4785 Hz. This will give rise to the HV's in the LC circuit, which will modulate the signal of L2. The L2 frequency with the driving frequency of 4785 Hz will be modified to a frequency of 5038 Hz. So now you have two frequencies being applied to the cell, 4.785kHz and 5.038kHz. These two frequencies will form a Modulated AM signal.
(http://www.globalkast.com/images/tonywoodside/Modulated_AM.png)
Harmonic oscillator III: Forced oscillations
http://nptel.iitm.ac.in/courses/Webcourse-contents/IIT-KANPUR/engg_mechanics/ui/Course_home_26.htm (http://nptel.iitm.ac.in/courses/Webcourse-contents/IIT-KANPUR/engg_mechanics/ui/Course_home_26.htm)

Br,
Webmug
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on December 24, 2011, 21:31:27 pm
think of this LCL circuit as a Filter circuit. You have a resonant frequency for L1 and the Cell, that will be your driving frequency. This driving frequency will be the same at the output of the L1 inductor, but the driving frequency modified by the L2 inductor to give a higher frequency. For example, Lets use Stan inductor values: L1 = 1262.7 mH, L2 = 1138 mH, and the calculated value for the cell is around 877nF. So the resonant frequency for L1 and C = 4785 Hz. This will give rise to the HV's in the LC circuit, which will modulate the signal of L2. The L2 frequency with the driving frequency of 4785 Hz will be modified to a frequency of 5038 Hz. So now you have two frequencies being applied to the cell, 4.785kHz and 5.038kHz. These two frequencies will form a Modulated AM signal.
(http://www.globalkast.com/images/tonywoodside/Modulated_AM.png)
Harmonic oscillator III: Forced oscillations
http://nptel.iitm.ac.in/courses/Webcourse-contents/IIT-KANPUR/engg_mechanics/ui/Course_home_26.htm (http://nptel.iitm.ac.in/courses/Webcourse-contents/IIT-KANPUR/engg_mechanics/ui/Course_home_26.htm)

Br,
Webmug
No feedback on this?
Voltage takes over due forced resonance oscillations from the chokes combined with the resonance cell (tuned on dielectric properties of water)?

Br,
Webmug
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on December 25, 2011, 03:48:01 am
You need to also remember that each resonant cavity and VIC transformer are matched. For example, lets say the coil will resonant at 3.5kHz, well the resonant cavity needs to also resonant at 3.5kHz. They have to be matched, just like a coil and antenna of a radio.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on December 27, 2011, 04:49:42 am
I'm having a sale this week on the Complete VIC circuit, 10% OFF
http://www.globalkast.com/products.htm (http://www.globalkast.com/products.htm)
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on December 27, 2011, 17:01:12 pm
meyer did it well...
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on December 27, 2011, 19:13:39 pm
Awesome, have you been selling a lot of them?

I've been working on my own design for a while,
and honestly If you guys look at the time and effort it
takes  to design, build, test, redesign etc I think
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on December 27, 2011, 19:40:29 pm
Awesome, have you been selling a lot of them?

I've been working on my own design for a while,
and honestly If you guys look at the time and effort it
takes  to design, build, test, redesign etc I think

Yea I started selling them back in July and sold out of them pretty quick. I have made so changes on the current ones that I am selling and they have been selling pretty good as well. I have a limited supply available and I also have kits available as well. It usually takes about 2 to 3 hours to complete one board. Yea you are right about the time and effort to build and design the boards. It took several months to back engineer this circuit and come up with the design.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on December 27, 2011, 20:33:16 pm
Dear Tony:

I wish you well in 2012 with your enterprise.  Are you interested in sharing how you determine the resonant frequency of your average 3 inch ss tube set?  much obliged..

kb
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on December 28, 2011, 10:35:25 am
Awesome, have you been selling a lot of them?

I've been working on my own design for a while,
and honestly If you guys look at the time and effort it
takes  to design, build, test, redesign etc I think

Yea I started selling them back in July and sold out of them pretty quick. I have made so changes on the current ones that I am selling and they have been selling pretty good as well. I have a limited supply available and I also have kits available as well. It usually takes about 2 to 3 hours to complete one board. Yea you are right about the time and effort to build and design the boards. It took several months to back engineer this circuit and come up with the design.

Hi Tony
with the greatest of respect you have done very well to re engineer the circuit and it is an enterprising person to market the product for the hard toil. It is an achievement to do so. For an educational and scientific view it is a worthy pursuit that should have its rewards.

The fact is no one so far has openly reported absolute success with non electrolyte 100% water cells that run an engine 100% conclusively.

I have always thought of the issue as.... is the entire circuit in its meyer form absolutely necessary and can the component count be reduced for smaller circuit board size.?

I know people have been told go study the science and electronics to experiment at the level others have. I also know people who have experimented extensively with electrolyte cells, gaps, voltage and % savings off current fuel usage and im told they get gains of between 20 to 40% whilst finding how to keep cells at about 2v and running cool and no or very little contaminant buildup in the cell.

So where to from here? a booster cell for current vehicle efficiency or 100% water as fuel........?

Over the next year I intend to study at my pace the Arduino microprocessor to replace the signal generation portion of the circuit that relies upon a mains supply and frequency as a core frequency for the circuit operation. What I dont know yet is the microprocessor programming (and how to use the 8 PWM they have) and how to properly implement the resonant scanning to raise the rate of scanning and reduce the scanning time to lock on.

To my mind theres 3 distinct sections: the pulse and timing and resonant scanning, 2 The Vic coil and 3 the Cell itself.

Perhaps advancing past the idea of using cells and to the injector and gas processor might be a worthy focus.

with respect

Cheers

Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on December 28, 2011, 19:08:06 pm
Yea you can pretty much reduce the size by using micro-controllers to simulate what this circuit does. You can use chips such as the 68HC11 to do just this. You can also use PID's chips. The 68HC11's can be a bit tricky in programming compared to a PID. The PID's are pretty easy to program, as the program itself is setup like MultiSim where you just build a simulation circuit and then download the schematic to the chip and there you have it all in one chip. As of right now these VIC circuits are for testing purposes, as more needs to be learned and studies to make a car 100% water efficient.
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on December 28, 2011, 23:08:34 pm
thanks, would you have a part number of a useful pid chip i can go research thanks
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 17, 2012, 18:46:49 pm
You need to also remember that each resonant cavity and VIC transformer are matched. For example, lets say the coil will resonant at 3.5kHz, well the resonant cavity needs to also resonant at 3.5kHz. They have to be matched, just like a coil and antenna of a radio.
More "Thoughts on how Meyer split water":
I think that this resonant frequency is a matched frequency on the molecular resonant frequency what SM called "Tune in on the dielectric properties of water".
If we re-read J.Keely on tuning into the "chord of mass" of the water molecule with a lower octave frequency, he established resonance with the molecule on a higher octave scale. Then when an enharmonic frequency(none harmonic) is introduced (read as GATE modulation: harmoniously adjusted thirds) he disintegrates the bonding "forces" of the water molecule.

He also wrote, this can only be done successful if the molecules are composed of differential atoms weights! In other words:the substance must contain heavy atoms and light atoms. The heavy atom or oxygen in water weights just 16 times as much as either of the hydrogen atoms to which it is joined by chemical affinity. Also this can be done with gas. The hydrogen is a faster atom in respect to the oxygen atom which is slower.

What I think Peter Davey has done is to oscillate the water molecule on the lower resonant harmonic (harmony) frequency using the higher overtone harmonic frequencies to tune into. These accelerated oscillations of the atoms has an effect of heat generation just like microwave (forced) oscillations but on lower energy input.

Comparison to fundamental / Interval to previous tone / Frequency ratio / Tone example / Frequency in Hz
fundamental frequency /   fundamental /  1:1 / C /       65
double frequency /   octave /     2:1/    c    /  130
trifold frequency /   fifth    /  3:2 /   g    /  195
http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-harmonics.htm (http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-harmonics.htm)

Problem is what the "chord of mass" is of the "water molecule"?

Chord
In Keely's SVP and music: more than one frequency sounded simultaneously. Modern terminology is vibration signature which is a graphical representation of more than one frequency sounded simultaneously or complex waveform.

The combination of three or more tones played at once. Diatonic c. uses only notes proper to the key. A triad is a chord of three notes in which the lowest is combined with the third and fifth above it. Common c. is a triad in root position. Dominant c. is founded on the dominant of the key. An inverted c. uses a tone other than the root as its lowest tone. Harmony is the study of chords and their relations.

Chord of the Mass
"Every Molecule contained in a homogeneous mass has the same harmonic oscillatory motion, which is the "chord of the mass" governed by the mass aggregation and the mass form. The "chord of the mass" is therefore the fundamental frequency of every Molecule of the mass".
Keely http://pondscienceinstitute.on-rev.com/svpwiki/tiki-index.php?page=chord+of+the+mass (http://pondscienceinstitute.on-rev.com/svpwiki/tiki-index.php?page=chord+of+the+mass)

Also if this fundamental frequency is know, then atoms can be split too on this same principle etc. !

Br,
Webmug
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 17, 2012, 20:41:35 pm
webmug
I read almost all people toughts on how water molecule is affected by voltage/freq.but the are verry contradictory...can you make/give me a link with a 3d drawing of the process?1000toughts 1000confuses..if you understand..
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 17, 2012, 21:48:09 pm
webmug
I read almost all people toughts on how water molecule is affected by voltage/freq.but the are verry contradictory...can you make/give me a link with a 3d drawing of the process?1000toughts 1000confuses..if you understand..
http://pondscienceinstitute.on-rev.com/svpwiki/tiki-index.php?page=subdivision

Electrostatic field is vibration(impulses on high frequency), also on the electron("=another name tag for oscillation on a specific frequency",particle or wave) so using this you are manipulating it already on level of high frequency. Polarization(=resonance of the water molecules) etc.

edit: 3D diagrams
http://pondscienceinstitute.on-rev.com/svpwiki/tiki-index.php?page=Figure+1.3.1+-+Subdivisions+of+Matter+and+Energy+according+to+Keely

Br,
Webmug
Title: Re: My Thoughts on how Meyer split water
Post by: Login to see usernames on March 17, 2012, 06:55:25 am
There is one frequency I came across where resonance occurred for me which I think may appear to be significant.  I am afraid I am not terribly advanced in physics, but what I have stumbled across I think supports it.

The frequency I found by experimenting is 5.71khz.  I noticed some interest in the forum around the number 1.059(...).  This factor lower than 5.71khz is 5.39khz which also appears to be a frequency associated with molecular resonance; at least per page 84 to 86 in document linked.  I'd like to know what anyone thinks of this.

http://ora.ouls.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid%3A676c8932-9c30-4776-a264-67405fe61c0c/datastreams/THESIS01

TS