Tube Demo Cell Pictures

[Login to see usernames]

My ultimate theory......


Regular electrolysis supplies electrons along with the voltage potential (grounded transformer, if any transformer at all). Since you are supplying the electrons, you add electrolyte to make it conduct large amounts of current for high yield. But, whenever electrons flow they collide making heat which impinges on their flow...creating losses.

Stan's setup supplies no extra electrons...he uses an ungrounded transformer....complete electrical isolation.
Think about it...how would we supply electrons into the water if the input circuit only pulses the primary?
Answer....we don't/can't

Any and all electrons that flow have to come from the secondary side of the setup...secondary, chokes and WFC

I know it may seem like a very simple concept...but, the truth is in the detail.

Knowing this simple fact, let us re-examine 

Since the primary will definitely create an induced voltage potential across the secondary, why are people who created rather nice replicas not seeing much gas production?

Well, it's because of that deceptively simple fact...no electrons are added. Because any electron flow through the secondary side of things is an externally driven (magnetic not electronic) closed loop...meaning, as an electron leaves the WFC one is coming back in....NO NET CHANGE!! (serpent eating its own tail)

You may say...well it's the same in regular electrolysis...and it is (in regards to how electrons flow)...however, the difference is the fact that along with your voltage potential, you are supplying electrons above and beyond equilibrium...this fuels chemical reactions, raises temp, and costs a lot since you are directly killing your dipole.

So, what's my point?

Ever wonder why the EEC in one of Stan's patents is just a bulb in series with the WFC? Ever wonder why every individual cell has it's own special resistor on the negative?

These electrons need something to do...by temporarily going into the EEC they are temporarily not in the water...when this happens, you have time for the water to seperate and move. Orthagonal fields help move these momentary ions out of the zone of dissasociation/re-association

I submit this VERY OLD video (I don't post on Youtube anymore) on the peculiar behavior of an ungrounded resonant transformer...Odd how it operates in contrary to "how it should" and actually gets brighter with more LEDs in series (my last Physics Prof didn't have much to say, other than, "Shouldn't be happening"...pshhh Academia hah)...I should of plunged em in water and see if I got some EVGray action...lol
Cold Electricity...oooohhh ahhhhh

[Login to see usernames]

Radiant,

Yes, the thing is to go for complete electrical isolation. This way you can provide way to take the electrons out of the water while not allowing them to leak from ground back into it. So you can give to the water a net charge that interacts at atomic levels changing the time share rate of the electrons witch in turn switch off the covalent bounding.


The amp consuming device could be a lamp or a heating element but would work even better if you are able to complicate it in the right way. 


If the positivity of the water is feed back into the primary thru a switching diode a positive feedback would result cause thru the ground not only the electrons going to the battery will go the positive side of the battery but extra electrons must pass thru the primary to stabilize the water.


This would create a positive feedback. Resonance.


Stan said that the electricity of the water (water as energy source) could be than go to the primary than restrict the amps allow voltage to take over... So it become a self oscillating system and works till there is water in the bucket.

[Login to see usernames]

Interesting theory, Radiant!

Have you tried such an EEC setup?

[Login to see usernames]

The Video you show, when you add more leds in series you are changing the impedance, probably you are reaching the point of greater energy transfer. This happens when the input impedance is = to the load impedance.


For example you have a 50ohms impedance source, than you have a transformer having a transformation factor of 10 than your load must have 5000ohms for maximum transfer.


If you have for example 100v and two amps you have 50ohm.


And if you have 1000v 0,2amps you have 5000ohms load.

[Login to see usernames]

Sure, impedance matching transfers most Power...however, this operation is subtle.

It is being pulsed by an astable 555, only one half of the oscillation is being used (DC). If this transformer was being driven in a normal manner (AC) than impedance matching becomes important because you have the input/output always linked via rolling AC wave (which creates a constant flux). However, in pulsed DC you have further isolation because of 50/50 duty cycle, whereas the largest induced potential is created after the primary is shut off (infinite impedance on primary). Also, what about when I hold the LED chain and it lights up? I couldn't record and do this, but, it lit up even when I had each part in different hands...across my arms and chest.

P.S. The primary, is around 24ga. and the secondary is fine hairlike wire...probably around 36ga....so, how would adding more resistance to the already much higher impeded secondary match these impedance? It wouldn't, it would maximize impedance bridging effect, whereas it is maximizing voltage transfer.

Furthermore, my multimeter shows 200+v, so does my O-scope, in spikes (It will step charge 12000uf caps up to this potential). This potential should destroy LEDs, yet it doesn't...


Anyway, I don't need to convince myself that the same circuit with a grounded secondary would destroy LEDs...If it clicks it clicks.


@Steve
Thanks,
And yes I have, and so have others (Dave Lawton, Ravi, etc)....This is where his Cold Electricity claim comes in!

[Login to see usernames]

Actually I think we want an impedance match with the coils only and a MISmatch with the WFC.

[Login to see usernames]

Impedance matching optimizes the POWER transfer...Power=Watts

We are not trying to put watts into the secondary, we want voltage (Hence VIC)...google impedance bridging, enough said.

[Login to see usernames]

It appears as though the slots could have been cut with a hacksaw and the bottom squared off with a small triangular
or flat file. There are definite angled marks on the edges of
slots. The slots on each tube are directly opposed fom each
other. This does not look like a milling bit was used. It is very rough.

I'm willing to bet that Stan made the slots for ease of assembly.
He wanted his cross drilled plastic rods for centering the top of the tubes to be down inside the tube a bit so he made the slots.
If he had to push the cross rods far into the tubes they may have been loose or broken from pushing far inside and not aligned very well.
Thus he could have them farther down by putting in the slots and then just moving the rods down only a half inch or so from the bottom of the slots.
That is the only reason I can think or for them to be there since it was not for tuning the tubes.
As Don said, the tubes are very crude and of different sizes so no tuning.

Cheers,
JP