Wow dankie you change teams more often then a 5 year old goes through girlfriends... You were advocating Stephen not too long ago as the real genius and now there is a 50/50 chance of him being a fraud...
I believe what dankie is trying to say with his post/s is that he cannot see how you can do it with the energy losses of conventionally availble parts for your application?
IF you can do it with frequency modulation you would need some seriousmodulation. This brings back memories of the harmonic atomizer people were playing with not to long ago...
Another point (this is from memory also) is that Puharich's work was to do with disolving clots in the brain, so i highly doubt that he was using tubes, more than likely probes (IMO) hence the water droplet tests.
You might be able to reduce your losses if you can be more specific with what you want. As there are large amount of losses with conventional AM modulators they also need to cover a large range of modulation. If you want to hit it with certain frequencies you "may" be able to reduce on those losses. First of all though you might want to take some baby steps and see if it can be done before working on your efficientcy.
As a side note the dielectric breakdown point of water with a thickness of 14mm is about 45kv. You would need marginally less if you just wanted to "strees" the molecule i guess.
Modulating 45kv will be difficult, modulating the ampere would be more dangerous than difficult i would think.
Either or, you reasearch is of great interest, to me atleast and i would greatly appreciate your on-going update, whether bad or good
