Cookies-law

Cookies help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
http://www.overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please leave this website now. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

Poplamp

poplamp

CCTool

CCTool

LEDTVforSale

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

OverUnity Book

overunity principles book

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

movieclipsfree

movie clips free

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Statistics

  • *Total Members: 81797
  • *Latest: geochem

  • *Total Posts: 487375
  • *Total Topics: 14340
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 3
  • *Guests: 229
  • *Total: 232

Facebook

Author Topic: Meyer's WFC concept analysed  (Read 65548 times)

Offline tulook

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 35
Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #90 on: July 08, 2008, 05:48:27 AM »
albert
Jr. Member
where is Ravi's stuff on this site btw ? ???

http://oupower.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1602&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=30

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #90 on: July 08, 2008, 05:48:27 AM »

Offline HeairBear

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 440
Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #91 on: July 08, 2008, 06:43:24 AM »
I am still researching Stan Meyer's tech but I haven't found anything to write about yet that hasn't been already achieved. I'm going to try something other than the Lawton/Ravi style which isn't producing what I need. My opinion at the moment is that it doesn't work as well as Stan's, plus, the designs are not even close to what Stan's circuits show. I'm going to try the alternator version next. Every time he has been documented running this version, he always had it set for 5V 2A input, so, that will be my goal.

(http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/136/meyeraltno2.jpg)

(http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/3358/sany0242qs2.jpg)

(http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/1945/stansrotaryyb5.jpg)

The Lawton compared to Stan. Lawton's is a mix of two different devices Stan used. You be the judge.

(http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/6185/stansvicfw6.jpg)

(http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/1162/stanspwmtq6.jpg)


Lawton's original...
(http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/8316/lawtonbq4.jpg)
« Last Edit: July 08, 2008, 07:12:49 AM by HeairBear »


Offline Farlander

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 107
Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #92 on: July 09, 2008, 01:28:51 AM »
Hi guys,

I was wondering Hydroman, where are your circuitry schematics?  You're device does seem to be superior in it's waveform generation and I'm about to purchase components so finding the best design is important.

Would you be willing to share?  I'm hoping to power my auto, heating, cooking with hydro.

Here is my latest plan, which needs verification by more educated members.  I will change the lawton circuit if I can find a better one!
(http://photos-b.ak.facebook.com/photos-ak-snc1/v265/124/102/26004137/n26004137_31760433_990.jpg)

Offline Farlander

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 107
Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #93 on: July 12, 2008, 01:45:00 AM »
HYDROMAN WHERE ARE YOU??

KISS

That oscope readout is the KEY


Offline cleanfuture

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #94 on: July 16, 2008, 03:23:32 AM »
Stan Meyer experimenters kits for sale on ebay. Item# 130239169501   

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #94 on: July 16, 2008, 03:23:32 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline slider1

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 18
Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #95 on: July 16, 2008, 10:00:57 PM »
HYDROMAN WHERE ARE YOU??

KISS

That oscope readout is the KEY

I agree. I think that no matter how you get there you need the step charge, High voltage is most important. One way to get there is with your PWM into a step up transformer output that signal into a full wave bridge. Now you have the pulse train that Meyer uses. When you take that signal and feed it to a capacitor or your WFC now you will get the STEP CHARGE effect this will keep charging until you have "catastrophic failure of the dielectric, (cap shorts out) then the pulse train starts again.

Offline canufi

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 47
    • http://www.youtube.com/user/canufi
Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #96 on: June 02, 2012, 01:06:33 PM »
Eg. A glass jar filled with electrolyte (water in our case), with an electrode immersed in the electrolyte in the jar, but with the other electrode on the outside of the jar. So the outer electrode could simply be a metal foil wrapped around the jar. We would then have glass as an insulator between the two electrodes. Due to the insulation properties of glass this would surely make for a relatively low loss capacitor. But then I have never seen this tried, so maybe there is a need for both electrodes to be in the electrolyte. Hence, the science is not quite as straight forward or obvious as many people would like to think.

This is impractical because Air has a dielectric breakdown. If you put the electrode outside the jar, you have to get rid of all the air since it will breakdown.  Think about it, why don't they make capacitors with the electrode outside the capacitor? Come on, don't be ridiculous.. they soak the electrode inside the capacitor.  Just because the capacitor has some impurities in it, doesn't mean it isn't a capacitor.. it's just a crappy capacitor which will break down easier, which may or may not benefit the entire process. We literally WANT the capacitor to break down to cause hydrogen production.   Water is a POOR conductor even with impurities in it, compared to something like copper.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #96 on: June 02, 2012, 01:06:33 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline canufi

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 47
    • http://www.youtube.com/user/canufi
Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #97 on: June 02, 2012, 01:14:46 PM »
And here's an interesting snippet of info.  When water ionises it is an endothermic reaction (ie, it takes energy from the environment - in the form of heat).  Does this explain why Meyer-type wfc's remain cool whilst still giving of a lot of gas!!  Definitely worthy of further consideration.

The reason Stan's device runs cool is because he is turning water into a highly conductive plasma near the electrodes, whereas in regular electrolysis the water functions as a Resistor. A conductor, is much more efficient than a resistor. Light bulbs that have more resistance, are less efficient and produce more heat.  As you heat up water, you also increase Brownian Motion which Stan may be taking advantage of which means that the free electrons get bopped around in the water due to brownian motion. 

Stan may in fact be tapping into brownian motion and making a special Brownian Ratchet that functions on random movement instead of requiring specific movement. The brownian ratchet was considered a failure of perpetual motion because it doesn't perform useful work, it is random work. The idea that brownian motion is not perpetual since it is not useful work is a complete lie told by physicists to cover up the fact that brownian motion violates the thermodynamics laws.  Whether or not the motion is random or not has NOTHING to do with whether it is perpetual motion.  You can trap random movement and turn it into useful work, scientists are just too arrogant and stupid to realize how to trap the random movement so they build over simplistic devices like the Feynman Brownian Ratchet which is a straw man device.

The whole point of dielectric breakdown is to form a plasma which is ionic - spark plugs conduct electricity through air... and yes if there were minerals floating around in the air the spark plug would still work! Just because water has minerals in it doesn't mean the process is now regular electrolysis. Are you saying if air has mineral impurities in it all of a sudden spark plugs no longer function? Don't be silly - they just breakdown the air easier.


Offline canufi

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 47
    • http://www.youtube.com/user/canufi
Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #98 on: June 02, 2012, 01:21:52 PM »
Classic claims don't make sense and never did to anyone that understands that tap water is a very 'good' conductor.

Tap Water is a resistor, it's not a good conductor. A good conductor is Copper.

Water is a poor conductor.

Just because you can get electrocuted in a bath tub, doesn't mean water is a good conductor.  You can get electrocuted with a resistor.. Duh!

Resistors are not great conductors.  Good conductors are plasma and copper wire.

Before criticizing Stan, you should educate yourself a bit first. 

So how do you turn water into a good conductor to reduce heat? High voltage causing plasma!  Regular electrolysis did not cause plasma or good conduction using no salts or little salts as possible.  You can still form a plasma if there are impurities in the water - do you have evidence that you can't turn water into plasma if there are impurities? So if a spark plug arcs across air that has impurities or calcium particles.. the spark plug no longer works and no plasma is created? I doubt this very much.  It just means the spark plug breaks down the air easier since it finds a conductive path quicker than with pure air.

Offline tejthemaverick

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #99 on: October 08, 2015, 12:05:14 PM »
In order to build a wfc that works we need to understand the self ionization of water. its is a process occuring spontaneously and dissociated species soon recombine. this is a random process occurring all the time. now the energy required for this self dissociation of water comes from the vacuum inside the water molecule. allow me to explain the various states of water that exist in nature, of which hydrino is very important:
1. Covalent water==Steam
2. polar water==aqueous form
3. Ionised water== H2O-->(H+) + (OH)-

Now to understand the source of energy for the spontaneous dissociation of water into its ions, we have to understand the structure of the water. The bonds betwwen the oxygen atom and hydrogen atoms is covalent in nature, slightly polar. Now one of these hydrogen atoms drops to lower state below the ground state, effectively falling closer to the oxygen atom. This energy is utilised to dissociate the water. Thus an OH- ion contains oxygen atom and a hydrino atom.
Hydrino does not exist in nature, it only exists as a combined form in water. Therefore when a water molecule self ionises, one hydrogen drops below its current state and allows the dissociation of the other hydrogen atom.
Consider an electrolysis cell where one electrode, preferably anode is coated with a dielectric. Now this cell becomes a capacitor, with the water acting as a extension of the cathode
Now when the electric voltage is applied to the cell, hydrogen is produced at the cathode and the hydroxy ions pile up at the anode dielectric layer. When the voltage is removed the hydroxyl ions move towards the cathode much like a spring, releasing the electrons at the cathode, much like a typical capacitor, producing oxygen and H+ ions.

For conventional electrolysis to take place 2 electrons are required for every water molecule to be split. But what happens when only 1 electron is supplied? a hydroxyl radical will be produced(OH.). So in a water fuel cell only the cathode conducts, electrons enter the cell through the cathode and leave the cell at the cathode only. Thus the same number of electron which were supplied during charging are removed during disharge. since every electron supplied at charging produces one hydroxyl ion, same electron when discharged produces hydroxyl radical. Now since a thin layer of hydrogen seems to be adsorbed onto the cathode during charging, it reacts with the hydroxyl ions when the reach the cathode during disharge.

So overall reaction is like this:
Self ionisation
H2O---> (H+)+(OH-) (oh- is the hydrino-oxygen ion)

cATHODE
charging:
(H2O)+(1e-) ---->( H) + (OH-)
discharge
(OH-) - (1e-)---->(OH.) hydrino radical

total
(H)+(OH)---->HHO

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #99 on: October 08, 2015, 12:05:14 PM »
Sponsored links:




 

Share this topic to your favourite Social and Bookmark site

Please SHARE this topic at: