Are we wasting our time trying to generate hydrogen better?
or should we focus on the atomic energy meyer and others talked about?
i think my plan will be to build an ioniser and start to work on my generator
im going to throw a lot of power trying to make the hydrogen fracture happens//
i would need an injector
i think the idea behind the injector is a device that allow the high electrically charged (high voltage gas) to be feed into the chamber under pressure, having ambient air already ionised with opposite polarity high positive in during the intake of air ...
im going to lift the generator in a acrylic isolation to make sure it will not discharge the gas as soon as it get into it
the system should work under some vacuum to but there may be a pump that pressurise the hydrogen and force a vacum on the cell to let air or exhaust gas to be circulated
tel me your findings on ionizers and combustion
You are correct, Fabio. There are two groups of researchers.
1 group is trying to see as much as hydrogen for a certain amount of consumed power. This is the biggest group.
The other group (very small) is looking for cold fusion or similar. (Basically just me and Kevin, hahahahahaha)
My main project is the Stephen Horvath replication and i also have some sub projects, like the Anderson replication.
I explain why. I have read the Meyer patents a 1000 times by now. I have analysed the Anderson video and patents. Same for the Horvath patents.
I tried to figure out what they had in common and what would have been the magic trick that is needed to run an engine on water.
This is a totally different technic as if you wanted to have just hydrogen working with a fuelcell.
If you put all the info on top of each other, the following comes out if you want to run yr powergenerator or car on water.
1. basic electrolysis, which we all know what that looks like. 2 electrodes, water, additive and current.
The outcome is also clear. H2 and O2.
The results with a car is that you need a lot of electrical power to produce like 15 liters of hho gas, so you can ran it.
2. When you start to use a pwm and start to pulse your electrolysis cell with current, something strange starts to happen.
You get a different type of gas. It contains more monotomic hydrogen atoms then with strait dc. What does that mean? Well, the wierd thing is that 2 single hydrogen atoms (not bonded) contains more mass and more
energy then H2. So you have a more powerfull gas and so you need less of it to run your engine.
3. Its clear and proven that monotomic hydrogen can attach to almost every other type of atoms. So, if you pump ionized ambient air thru your waterbath during a pulsed electrolysis proces, you create ammonia gas.
That has again more mass and energy then HHO. So you need again less gass to run your engine.
4. It is clear that there are more ways to Rome, italy. If you are able to add a magnetic field to the electrodes for speeding up the hydrogen atoms and if you add specific laser energy or soft x rays, then you can create the isotope deuterium during the electrolysis process. That molecule has again more mass and energy. You need again less liters of it to run an engine.
5. All inventors added waterdrop / vapour and a higher voltage spark to their system. They created thermo explosive reactions. The water dropped the burnrate, it cooled the engine and you got more power as the waterdrops also splitted into hydrogen and oxygen and burned as well.
Some people call it cold fusion.
6. Meyer went even a step futher by ionization of the ambient air oxygen. By doing so, he created more power. I have tested that and it works. Again, you need less liters of gas and so on.
So, which way do you want to travel?
