A green and clean environment is a human right!
Projects by members => Projects by members => J. Miller => Topic started by: jim miller on October 07, 2012, 15:29:51 pm
-
A 1989 video of John Gilvesey's visit to Stanley Meyers Grove City laboratory has been located and sections will be part of an upcoming Stanley Meyer Documentary. Title
and date of release TBD. "JP" was the videographer who went to the Grove City lab in 1989 with John Gilvesey an investor.
See video list 57 http://www.ionizationx.com/index.php/topic,2116.0.html Section2 Unreleased tapes
-
The picture of Gilvesey holding the Hydrogen Gas Gun is a 35 mm still photo.
It is not from the video.
Here is a scan of original photo.
JP
-
Hi Jim,
Can you tell me the relation between dan danforth and Gilvesey?
Why is dd schematic in here?
Steve
-
The picture of Gilvesey holding the Hydrogen Gas Gun is a 35 mm still photo.
It is not from the video.
Here is a scan of original photo.
JP
Hi JP,
Thanks for posting the great picture. I look forward to future material related to Stanley Meyer being presented. He was a wonderful human being.
Best regards,
mina
-
Steve, John Gilvesey was an investor. Danny was an experimenter in what was then Sri Lanka when Stan went there. I'm moving the Danforth photos and material over to another part of your site. As far as I know they didn't know each other. :-[
-
Thanks Jim, looking forward to them...
Steve
-
Hi Jim,
Can you tell me the relation between dan danforth and Gilvesey?
Why is dd schematic in here?
Steve
Gilvesey had nothing to do with Danforth.
I introduced John Gilvesey to Meyer in 1986.
I met him at a "Water in Industry" conference I attended in Los Angles. This one cost $500 to attend.
I used to attend as many such conferences as possible to promote Stan's work and attract investors.
I was discussing the Indy Car project with a handful of CEO's from Bechtel and other major companies and Gilvesey was standing there.
He grabbed me and took me aside and said, "I want to do that." He told me that ever since high school science class he had questioned why we could not run cars on hydrogen generated on board the car.
He had a room at the hotel of the conference and I had my WFC Dealership videos and materials. We watched them as I explained what I knew to him and we called Stan in the morning to set up a visit to Ohio. Gilvesey lived in Canada, I forget where. After talking to Stan we went to the airport and he bought my ticket to go to Ohio about a week later.
When we got there we spent two days getting the usual lab lectures and cell demonstrations from which I made my video.
Gilvesey got more interested in Stan's systems for doing clean up of toxic waste as that was the type of business Gilvesey was involved.
He wound up helping Stan to the tune of $250,000 when Stan was planning to run the buggy in the World Solar Challenge in Australia. For reasons unknown to me the buggy was not ready to run by race time so that demonstration failed. At about this time the court case arose and all hell broke loose when Stan lost the case.
In the end Stan accused Gilvesey along with others of planning to team up with a guy in Reno named Rudy Gunderson (sp?) that had something called A51 fuel, I think, which made hydrogen from water with some chemicals.
Needless to say, Gilversey didn't have anything good to say about Stan and his lost investment when I spoke to him last in the early 1990's.
The Danforth sketch and data showed up on the Internet sometime around 1997. It was posted on a lone website that eventually disappeared.
Thankfully I had kept copies of the drawings and recitation he gave.
When I questioned Stan about Danforth's claim that Stan had shown him the circuit and gave him the drawing, Stan denied that he gave it to him but I know for a fact that Stan had been to Sri Lanka.
I'm sure Stan was not being truthful here because anyone can see from the original sketch that it has Stan's "finger prints" all over it as to the cell sketch. No one else could have possibly made that drawing and how in the world would Danforth have ever come up with the story and technical information unless he got it from Stan. I don't think Stan had any idea that the Internet would make it possible for someone to share what he had disclosed one the other side of the world a couple of years prior.
It does show that Stan tried to show the basics to people in a country that could never compete with him in developments but that needed the technology and would have the basics if Stan failed to bring it to the world from America.
Cheers,
JP
-
JP
Thanks for sharing some of the background information about John Gilvesey and his trip to Grove City to see Stan's laboratory
in 1986. Also thanks for documenting the visit with a video because Stan was somewhat of a secretive person who obviously trusted you and appreciated the promotional efforts you had made in his behalf during the ten or more years you knew him.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Danforth Analysis
Circuit
"The Danforth Prototype circuit had to have some modifications from Stanley Meyer Cluster Array Demonstration Cell due to the lack of availability of certain parts in Sri Lanka. The transformer was a standard 8 amp 24V step-down transformer of the type which might have been used in a furnace control. A standard Whetstone bridge circuit (25 amp rating) was used to rectify the AC current to DC current with a large 10,000 mfd capacitor to smooth out some ripples and to store a very large charge. The 2n222 was a general purpose bipolar bjt general purpose transistor-- mouser part 610-2n222. The 2n3055 was a bipolar bjt npn power switching transistor-- mouser part number 511-2n3055 A 555 timing chip was used with small 2-5K potentiometerwas used to control the frequency input to the power transistor section of the circuit. A parallel-serial arrangement of 15 ohm resistors was made to form a 22.5 ohm 6 watt resistor. A 20 amp fuse protects the circuit which in some ways is similar to a fly-back circuit.
Cell
The outer container to hold the water consisted of OD 3.75 in acrylic /perspex with circular disks cut to provide the top and bottom of the cell as well as give support to the outer and inner ( at the bottom of the cell) stainless electrode tubes. Two of the acrylic discs were used to form the top and end of the cell. Two of the disks had a large hexagon shaped hole through which the larger 7 tube assembly fit,(Disks labelled C) Two disks were drilled to allow the passage of the seven smaller tubes (Disks labelled B) The cell consisted of 7 pairs of exciter tubes and 7 smaller inner exciter tubes
Outer Tubes Material 410 Stainless
OD 1.0 in
ID .875
Length 12 inches
Inner Tubes Material 410 Stainless
OD .375
ID .250
Length 13.5
The inner tubes were connected electrically as one unit by stainless straps.The outer tubes. are attached together as one electrical unit using stainless steel strapping with the grounding plate at the top of the cell which differed from Stanley Meyers Cluster Array Unit which had it at the bottom of the cell. Spacing was provided by the acrylic disks .Power to the cell came from connectors on the top acrylic plate of the cell."
-
@JP:
Thanks for the background information into Stan's early years. A lot of the pieces to the puzzle are now starting to come together better than before. You were very close to Stan and knew the man behind the invention well. I'm very pleased to hear the stories of your endevours with Stan. Even the non-technical portions. One day, maybe you could write a book chronicling Stan's life and his world changing invention.
This means a lot to many of the people here, as we could have only dreamed of being Stan's close friend.
Warm regards,
mina
-
Welcome JP
Nice to hear from you your nice point of view.
I believe dan danfor may have watched one of stans presentation than worked around to get it to work up there... I think stan diagrams are clear enough and if he was indeed telling all about the theory a person with all required knowledge in the art should be able to understand and replicate somehow.
-
Hi Jim,
Can you tell me the relation between dan danforth and Gilvesey?
Why is dd schematic in here?
Steve
Gilvesey had nothing to do with Danforth.
I introduced John Gilvesey to Meyer in 1986.
I met him at a "Water in Industry" conference I attended in Los Angles. This one cost $500 to attend.
I used to attend as many such conferences as possible to promote Stan's work and attract investors.
I was discussing the Indy Car project with a handful of CEO's from Bechtel and other major companies and Gilvesey was standing there.
He grabbed me and took me aside and said, "I want to do that." He told me that ever since high school science class he had questioned why we could not run cars on hydrogen generated on board the car.
He had a room at the hotel of the conference and I had my WFC Dealership videos and materials. We watched them as I explained what I knew to him and we called Stan in the morning to set up a visit to Ohio. Gilvesey lived in Canada, I forget where. After talking to Stan we went to the airport and he bought my ticket to go to Ohio about a week later.
When we got there we spent two days getting the usual lab lectures and cell demonstrations from which I made my video.
Gilvesey got more interested in Stan's systems for doing clean up of toxic waste as that was the type of business Gilvesey was involved.
He wound up helping Stan to the tune of $250,000 when Stan was planning to run the buggy in the World Solar Challenge in Australia. For reasons unknown to me the buggy was not ready to run by race time so that demonstration failed. At about this time the court case arose and all hell broke loose when Stan lost the case.
In the end Stan accused Gilvesey along with others of planning to team up with a guy in Reno named Rudy Gunderson (sp?) that had something called A51 fuel, I think, which made hydrogen from water with some chemicals.
Needless to say, Gilversey didn't have anything good to say about Stan and his lost investment when I spoke to him last in the early 1990's.
The Danforth sketch and data showed up on the Internet sometime around 1997. It was posted on a lone website that eventually disappeared.
Thankfully I had kept copies of the drawings and recitation he gave.
When I questioned Stan about Danforth's claim that Stan had shown him the circuit and gave him the drawing, Stan denied that he gave it to him but I know for a fact that Stan had been to Sri Lanka.
I'm sure Stan was not being truthful here because anyone can see from the original sketch that it has Stan's "finger prints" all over it as to the cell sketch. No one else could have possibly made that drawing and how in the world would Danforth have ever come up with the story and technical information unless he got it from Stan. I don't think Stan had any idea that the Internet would make it possible for someone to share what he had disclosed one the other side of the world a couple of years prior.
It does show that Stan tried to show the basics to people in a country that could never compete with him in developments but that needed the technology and would have the basics if Stan failed to bring it to the world from America.
Cheers,
JP
Thanks JP!
Good explanation and theory.
I think you are right.
For sure the schematic of Dan is not correct, but the idea should do the same as Stans schematic.
The whole question is what to expect from the setup......
I know from first hand that the alternator setup of Stan was consuming large amounts of amps.
So much that the cables running to the cell became very hot.....
Steve
-
Hi Jim,
Can you tell me the relation between dan danforth and Gilvesey?
Why is dd schematic in here?
Steve
Gilvesey had nothing to do with Danforth.
I introduced John Gilvesey to Meyer in 1986.
I met him at a "Water in Industry" conference I attended in Los Angles. This one cost $500 to attend.
I used to attend as many such conferences as possible to promote Stan's work and attract investors.
I was discussing the Indy Car project with a handful of CEO's from Bechtel and other major companies and Gilvesey was standing there.
He grabbed me and took me aside and said, "I want to do that." He told me that ever since high school science class he had questioned why we could not run cars on hydrogen generated on board the car.
He had a room at the hotel of the conference and I had my WFC Dealership videos and materials. We watched them as I explained what I knew to him and we called Stan in the morning to set up a visit to Ohio. Gilvesey lived in Canada, I forget where. After talking to Stan we went to the airport and he bought my ticket to go to Ohio about a week later.
When we got there we spent two days getting the usual lab lectures and cell demonstrations from which I made my video.
Gilvesey got more interested in Stan's systems for doing clean up of toxic waste as that was the type of business Gilvesey was involved.
He wound up helping Stan to the tune of $250,000 when Stan was planning to run the buggy in the World Solar Challenge in Australia. For reasons unknown to me the buggy was not ready to run by race time so that demonstration failed. At about this time the court case arose and all hell broke loose when Stan lost the case.
In the end Stan accused Gilvesey along with others of planning to team up with a guy in Reno named Rudy Gunderson (sp?) that had something called A51 fuel, I think, which made hydrogen from water with some chemicals.
Needless to say, Gilversey didn't have anything good to say about Stan and his lost investment when I spoke to him last in the early 1990's.
The Danforth sketch and data showed up on the Internet sometime around 1997. It was posted on a lone website that eventually disappeared.
Thankfully I had kept copies of the drawings and recitation he gave.
When I questioned Stan about Danforth's claim that Stan had shown him the circuit and gave him the drawing, Stan denied that he gave it to him but I know for a fact that Stan had been to Sri Lanka.
I'm sure Stan was not being truthful here because anyone can see from the original sketch that it has Stan's "finger prints" all over it as to the cell sketch. No one else could have possibly made that drawing and how in the world would Danforth have ever come up with the story and technical information unless he got it from Stan. I don't think Stan had any idea that the Internet would make it possible for someone to share what he had disclosed one the other side of the world a couple of years prior.
It does show that Stan tried to show the basics to people in a country that could never compete with him in developments but that needed the technology and would have the basics if Stan failed to bring it to the world from America.
Cheers,
JP
Hi JP,
Do you know if anybody knows who Dan Danfort is in real life?
Is he still alive?
Do you know if anybody ever succeeded in replicating his setup?
If i ask to much questions, just let me know... :)
Steve
-
Any progress with the research? ;D
been a while that I was here
-
Hi Jim,
Can you tell me the relation between dan danforth and Gilvesey?
Why is dd schematic in here?
Steve
Gilvesey had nothing to do with Danforth.
I introduced John Gilvesey to Meyer in 1986.
I met him at a "Water in Industry" conference I attended in Los Angles. This one cost $500 to attend.
I used to attend as many such conferences as possible to promote Stan's work and attract investors.
I was discussing the Indy Car project with a handful of CEO's from Bechtel and other major companies and Gilvesey was standing there.
He grabbed me and took me aside and said, "I want to do that." He told me that ever since high school science class he had questioned why we could not run cars on hydrogen generated on board the car.
He had a room at the hotel of the conference and I had my WFC Dealership videos and materials. We watched them as I explained what I knew to him and we called Stan in the morning to set up a visit to Ohio. Gilvesey lived in Canada, I forget where. After talking to Stan we went to the airport and he bought my ticket to go to Ohio about a week later.
When we got there we spent two days getting the usual lab lectures and cell demonstrations from which I made my video.
Gilvesey got more interested in Stan's systems for doing clean up of toxic waste as that was the type of business Gilvesey was involved.
He wound up helping Stan to the tune of $250,000 when Stan was planning to run the buggy in the World Solar Challenge in Australia. For reasons unknown to me the buggy was not ready to run by race time so that demonstration failed. At about this time the court case arose and all hell broke loose when Stan lost the case.
In the end Stan accused Gilvesey along with others of planning to team up with a guy in Reno named Rudy Gunderson (sp?) that had something called A51 fuel, I think, which made hydrogen from water with some chemicals.
Needless to say, Gilversey didn't have anything good to say about Stan and his lost investment when I spoke to him last in the early 1990's.
The Danforth sketch and data showed up on the Internet sometime around 1997. It was posted on a lone website that eventually disappeared.
Thankfully I had kept copies of the drawings and recitation he gave.
When I questioned Stan about Danforth's claim that Stan had shown him the circuit and gave him the drawing, Stan denied that he gave it to him but I know for a fact that Stan had been to Sri Lanka.
I'm sure Stan was not being truthful here because anyone can see from the original sketch that it has Stan's "finger prints" all over it as to the cell sketch. No one else could have possibly made that drawing and how in the world would Danforth have ever come up with the story and technical information unless he got it from Stan. I don't think Stan had any idea that the Internet would make it possible for someone to share what he had disclosed one the other side of the world a couple of years prior.
It does show that Stan tried to show the basics to people in a country that could never compete with him in developments but that needed the technology and would have the basics if Stan failed to bring it to the world from America.
Cheers,
JP
Hi JP,
Do you know if anybody knows who Dan Danfort is in real life?
Is he still alive?
Do you know if anybody ever succeeded in replicating his setup?
If i ask to much questions, just let me know... :)
Steve
I don't know of anyone who knew him.
Like I said, the sketch and data were the only thing on a website that went down some years ago. There was no contact information on the site.
I guess I could have found website owner back then but didn't.
I emailed Arthur C. Clark, who narrated the "It Runs on Water" documentary that showed the buggy being pushed in the driveway.
Clark was living in Sri Lanka and said he didn't know Danforth or anything about the experiment.
He sent me this:
From: blenheim@xxx.lanka.net
To: H2OPWRD@xxx.com (H2OPWRD)
Dear Mr.W,
Thanks to yours of 11 May - I've not replied before, because I've
been trying to find out about the Sri Lanka experiments - no luck
so far, though I've accessed the Website involved.
Would be very interested to hear about the results from any
investigation of Meyer's work.
All good wishes,
Arthur
14 May 98
(end)
At this time I don't know of anyone who has copied that circuit and experimented successfully.
There are a few looking at it but for years many argued about what the actual components and circuit were supposed to do.
I hope someone has success with it and shares it.
Cheers,
JP