Viktor Schauberger and electrolysis

[Login to see usernames]

The whole process of electrolysis as presently taught is a wide spread fraud - V Schauberger , article 1932 "Electrolysis" #3443 , page 20 , 18 dec 1932 , "Der Wiener Tag"  (< I dont know german but thats the magazine)


**I did a raid from famous wiki....

 A reagent /riˈeɪdʒənt/ is a "substance or compound that is added to a system in order to bring about a chemical reaction, or added to see if a reaction occurs."[1] Although the terms reactant and reagent are often used interchangeably, a reactant is more specifically a "substance that is consumed in the course of a chemical reaction".[1] Solvents, although they are involved in the reaction, are usually not referred to as reactants. Similarly, catalysts are not consumed by the reaction, so are not described as reactants

The most common catalyst is the hydrogen ion (H+).

Protic solvent
In chemistry, a protic solvent is a solvent that has a hydrogen atom bound to an oxygen (as in a hydroxyl group) or a nitrogen (as in an amine group). In general terms, any solvent that contains labile H+ is called a protic solvent. The molecules of such solvents readily donate protons (H+) to reagents. Conversely, aprotic solvents cannot donate hydrogen.

Polar protic solvents are often used to dissolve salts. In general, these solvents have high dielectric constants and high polarity.
 
Common characteristics of protic solvents :
 solvents display hydrogen bonding
 solvents have an acidic hydrogen (although they may be very weak acids such as ethanol)
 solvents dissolve salts cations by unshared free electron pairs
 anions by hydrogen bonding

Examples include water, most alcohols, formic acid, hydrogen fluoride, and ammonia. Polar protic solvents are favorable for SN1 reactions, while polar aprotic solvents are favorable for SN2 reactions.
 
Polar aprotic solvents
Polar aprotic solvents are solvents that will dissolve many salts, but lack an acidic hydrogen. These solvents generally have intermediate dielectric constants and polarity. Although discouraging use of the term "polar aprotic", IUPAC describes such solvents as having both high dielectric constants and high dipole moments, an example being acetonitrile. Other solvents meeting IUPAC's criteria include DMF, HMPA, and DMSO.[1]
 

**remember : water is self ionizing
 

[Login to see usernames]

I try to understand what you want to share here, but i fail a bit.
Can you please explain what is so fraud about the current electrolysis theory?

[Login to see usernames]

 
I cant read German but if VS says its fraud thats good enough by me . basically what is in there is ,  the so called "catalyst" breaks down over time.

because I cant read german I did search to get a handle on what he may be on about.
Other than that , we have all heard of water being the worlds most powerful solvent , if it is or not , I dont know but it IS a solvent .
we are also reminded that electrolyte is the "catalyst" and we just add water , .....its reconstituted into what it started out as ,so water was an integral part of its make up in the first place .

the production of the electrolyte is through chem process , ELECTROLYSIS or distillation where water is removed . production of the chemical isnt factored into so called effeciency of electrolysis or the over unity everyone goes on about
(....but then petrol production isnt factored into energy yeild etc when compared to water hydrogen production either)


self ionization of water according to science 2H2O = OH- and H3O+  , theoretically OH bond is the easiest to break , both sodium and potassium hydroxide are hydroxides themselves = OH-


the wiki.....
KOH, like NaOH, serves as a source of OH− , a highly nucleophilic anion that attacks polar bonds in both inorganic and organic materials.

me.....
water is also a source of OH-  . So through electrolysis NaOH and KOH are only used for the exchange for OH- (of course both plates are at work etc)

Im not a chemist I can ONLY go by what science says and largely what is accessible on the net , which is a mountain.

The fact is that the chemicals used for electrolysis of water are reconstituted , the water has already been removed < that is NOT factored into the final analysis of hydrogen production .

A person in a shed separating water into gas is the person at the very END of a production chain
The producer of the chemical makes a mountain of money .
the person in the shed makes a discovery .... reconstituted chemical process that the factory already performed before sale of product on the shelf.

now this is MY view not Schaubergers , I would like to read his article .   I myself finished with electrolysis in about 1999 , I still have the container remains unused.
to me it is pointless . There are examples of people with series cells pumping out gas and good for them , their efforts have paid off .
Me , I want something else , I have done the basics of Joe cell experiments etc so from that shows clearly an additive to the water is not necessary .

according to info
-solvent is not reactant
-catalyst is not reactant
-most common catalyst is OH-  ...............(found in both water and hydroxide K or Na)
-In general terms, any solvent that contains labile H+ is called a protic solvent. The molecules of such solvents readily donate protons (H+) to reagents.  ......(which ones the reagent again?)
-Polar protic solvents are often used to dissolve salts. In general, these solvents have high dielectric constants and high polarity.
 .......water has high dielectric value


I stopped with chemical additives , I say electrolysis is limited by the chemical process itself , the chemical wants what it wants and in general it gives up diatomic gas and heat . careful construction can generate monatomic gas in small amounts.
the most outstanding thing with electrolysis is the generation of browns gas monatomic , and that was high lighted by George Wiseman , an almost unknown as time goes by.

water is uniform H and Oxy ,with minimal contaminants , it is not bound to what the chem additive wants simply because the additive isnt there. If diatomic and monatomic gas is possible then uniformity also possible .
no one knows what volt readings were across the plates on stans bench top cell , no one knows if the gas is diatomic or monatomic .
in the Video ,from the amount of gas bubbling away I would say it is definitely monatomic .
I can only imagine the cell remins cold .... I was not there so that is a guess

hey stevo day time your side is night time my side so forgive me I wouldve been tired . now Im awake , forgive me for ..... ah what ever

[Login to see usernames]

The whole process of electrolysis as presently taught is a wide spread fraud - V Schauberger , article 1932 "Electrolysis" #3443 , page 20 , 18 dec 1932 , "Der Wiener Tag"  (< I dont know german but thats the magazine)

I think if there's some kind of fraud associated with electrolysis, it's the claim that electricity must be put into the process for it to happen.  Steve recently posted some heavy math, which he said showed that electrolysis should produce electricity.  At any rate, it shouldn't require two polarities.  When electrolysis was first discovered, they were charging a leyden jar which was filled with water.  Bubbles formed, then ignited when the central electrode sparked to the water itself.  This proved hydrogen production, but it also shows that the water itself had become charged - oppositely to the contacting electrode.