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.

# New Book

### Statistics

• Total Posts: 482289
• Total Topics: 14218
• Online Today: 44
• Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
• Users: 10
• Guests: 204
• Total: 214

### Author Topic: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed  (Read 44878 times)

#### tao

• TPU-Elite
• Sr. Member
• Posts: 378
##### Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #30 on: November 27, 2007, 03:53:15 PM »
The capacitance of the cells are a problem in terms of giving it a value. This is not only just because everyones cells will offer a different surface area to everyone elses, but also that the state of the dielectric layer will be different. I.e. how 'conditioned' the electrodes are in terms of the dielectric layer thickness.

Purely out of interest, I recently did a rough calculation of the capacitance of Bob Boyces 100 cell (6" x 6"), assuming 10 microns of dielectric and came up with a figure of 258nF.

The thing about the water is, that although it conducts (it is a non-linear resistor), it is far less an efficient conductor than metal. In water, large ions are travelling through the electrolyte, carrying their charges from one side to the other.  You can actually see the disturbance in the water that this causes. On the other hand, electrons are tiny (you can't see the metal moving) and effectively only have to travel between one atom and the next. A bit like a line of ballbearings in a tube, if you fill the tube and then push an extra one in one end, another will immediately pop out the other end. Hence electron flow is near instantaneous, where as ion current through an electrolyte is very slow.

This leads me to think that even 'unconditioned' electrodes will show some capacitance, as the ions are physically so much slower than the electrons that they will not be able to keep up with the charge exchange in order to balance the circuit when faced with a near instantaneous squarewave pulse. Electrons then will tend to pile up on the cathode with every pulse, while the same can be said about the +ve 'holes' on the anode.

Initially I thought that the size of the gap between the metal electrodes might become irrelevant if the dielectric was the oxide layer, but on thinking about this further, the closer the two metal electrodes the more intense the electrostatic field across the water before the oxide layer breaks down.

All good stuff!

Considering the ions and their role here... It would make sense to want to restrict their movements by not allowing them to journey from one electrode to the next. So, like you said, 'a near instantaneous pulse' should be used.

I would also like to bring to your attention a find I had, which might actually be true and play a key part or not. It involves pulsing the 'tube' electrodes of the WFC at their approximate or actual ACOUSTIC resonant frequency. I made this find by chance, but who really knows if it is merely a coincidence.

IF this process is involved, it could be somehow holding the ions from successfully moving from one cylindrical electrode to the other, or at least deterring them from doing so.

Anyway, just thought I would bring it up.

Quote
Ravi,

Do you know the approximate frequency at which you are applying the square wave pulses to your WFC?

The reason why is related to some research I did with a well known 'water as a fuel' research group.....

Here was the crux of my interesting finding:

The findings are based on this youtube video from Dave Lawton: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miwbvsya3Ek , WATCH IT!

[4/1/2007 3:40:25 PM] Tao says:
Just doing a simple calculation a tube in plain fresh water, the equation from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acoustic_resonance shows f=(n*v)/(2*L) where n corresponds to the harmonic, v is the speed of sound in the water, and L is the length of the tube....

So, lets simplify this equation, n can be always 1, v is 1435 m/s in fresh water according to Wikipedia.

So, f = (1*1435)/(2*L) = 717.5 / L = f , Just for fun, lets take the frequency Dave was producing Hydroxy at in his latest video on Youtube: 3425.781Hz

So, 3425.781 = 717.5 / L , L = 717.5 / 3425.781 = 0.21 meters , So that would be 8.27 inches long.... So, how long in inches are Dave's tubes? Just curious........

[4/2/2007 11:26:20 PM] Tao says:
So, I asked how long Dave's tubes were, well, I looked up how long they were from an old post Dave did on the original forum back in 2004...

[4/2/2007 11:26:44 PM] Tao says:
Dave said that his tubes were about 12.5-13cm (which is about 5 inches long)

[4/2/2007 11:27:39 PM] Tao says:
so, calculating that into the equation: 717.5 / L = f , we have 717.5 / 0.1275 = f , so f = about 5650Hz

[4/2/2007 11:28:21 PM] Tao says:
So, based on what it says at the END of that video on youtube, it says that the hydroxy was being produced at 3425.78Hz

[4/2/2007 11:29:00 PM] Tao says:
BUT, they acoustic frequency came out to be 5650Hz, so I said, 'oh, too bad' seems there isn't much of a connection, I guess I need to
do more research'

[4/2/2007 11:29:10 PM] Tao says:
UNTIL, I just watched that video again..........

[4/2/2007 11:29:50 PM] Tao says:
Look at what Dave was pulsing his DC at in the video: 5714Hz!!!!
At 1:11 in the video you can see what he was pulsing at.......

[4/2/2007 11:30:58 PM] Tao says:
Based on the equation for acoustic resonance, Dave was pulsing his tubes at the EXACT frequency at which those tubes will resonate ACOUSTICALLY in FRESH WATER...

So, my finding was basically this:

Dave found the BEST gas production at the VERY SAME frequency that just so happens to be where his tubes resonate ACOUSTICALLY IN WATER... HMMM...

Maybe it is nothing at all but a coincidence, but maybe there is just something to it........................
? Last Edit: August 26, 2007, 09:02:47 PM by tao ?

#### Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

##### Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #30 on: November 27, 2007, 03:53:15 PM »

#### Farrah Day

• Hero Member
• Posts: 556
##### Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #31 on: November 27, 2007, 05:05:05 PM »
Hi Tao

Yes, I've seen your post before and read it with interest. It does make you wonder if there is any correlation between pulses and acoustic resonance. However, if this is so, then how the tubes are mounted (fixed), would surely be of crucial importance and surely affect the theoretical frequency, as would the water medium.

I find a problem with so many ideas floating about, is that unless you specifically research one area, you can easily end up with a mish-mash of theories that obscure each other and culminate in nothing. Focusing on one direction at a time I think is good. Then, if and when that avenue is exhausted, turn your attention to others.

So, I'll be leaving you to your acoustic resonance for the time being, Tao.  Will be very interested to know how your research in this area progresses.

I'm not seeing the ions in tap water to be a real problem at the moment, as with fast rise voltage pulses they simply shouldn't be able to move fast enough to do much work.  My analogy: I think of them as soldiers arriving late for the battle. Electrons will be amassing at the cathode before the ions have had time to register it!

Hence, I would expect there to be a bottle-neck of electrons on the cathode, even without any substantial dielectric oxide layer.  The question then is, can this bottle-neck build to such a potential that water molecules themselves are encouraged to ionise?

This is where I feel a little unsteady at present. However, I have a theory:

I know that water molecules are continuously ionising and then reverting back to water molecules, it is a continuous and continuously reversible process. I also know that water tends to convert back to molecules faster than it ionises, hence there will always be more water molecules than ions (note that, I'm talking about water itself and it's ions, not the ions of impurities within the water).

What then if the high electrostatic field on the plates allows the water to ionise as usual, but then discourages it from reforming as water.  Think about it, a water molecule ionises, but before the reaction can reverse it is now influenced by the high electrostatic forces on the electrodes. Does it reform with another lowly charged ion or head for the 'bright light' of highly charged electrode 'city'. A bag of crisps or an 'all you can eat' gourmet meal at a top notch restaurant.

Apologies for my very unscientific analogies.

#### Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

##### Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #31 on: November 27, 2007, 05:05:05 PM »

#### tao

• TPU-Elite
• Sr. Member
• Posts: 378
##### Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #32 on: November 27, 2007, 06:34:05 PM »
Hi Tao

Yes, I've seen your post before and read it with interest. It does make you wonder if there is any correlation between pulses and acoustic resonance. However, if this is so, then how the tubes are mounted (fixed), would surely be of crucial importance and surely affect the theoretical frequency, as would the water medium.

I find a problem with so many ideas floating about, is that unless you specifically research one area, you can easily end up with a mish-mash of theories that obscure each other and culminate in nothing. Focusing on one direction at a time I think is good. Then, if and when that avenue is exhausted, turn your attention to others.

So, I'll be leaving you to your acoustic resonance for the time being, Tao.  Will be very interested to know how your research in this area progresses.

It was all merely a passing thought, as I know the process is more inline with what you outline below...

I'm not seeing the ions in tap water to be a real problem at the moment, as with fast rise voltage pulses they simply shouldn't be able to move fast enough to do much work.  My analogy: I think of them as soldiers arriving late for the battle. Electrons will be amassing at the cathode before the ions have had time to register it!

Hence, I would expect there to be a bottle-neck of electrons on the cathode, even without any substantial dielectric oxide layer.  The question then is, can this bottle-neck build to such a potential that water molecules themselves are encouraged to ionise?

Agreed.

This is where I feel a little unsteady at present. However, I have a theory:

I know that water molecules are continuously ionising and then reverting back to water molecules, it is a continuous and continuously reversible process. I also know that water tends to convert back to molecules faster than it ionises, hence there will always be more water molecules than ions (note that, I'm talking about water itself and it's ions, not the ions of impurities within the water).

What then if the high electrostatic field on the plates allows the water to ionise as usual, but then discourages it from reforming as water.  Think about it, a water molecule ionises, but before the reaction can reverse it is now influenced by the high electrostatic forces on the electrodes. Does it reform with another lowly charged ion or head for the 'bright light' of highly charged electrode 'city'. A bag of crisps or an 'all you can eat' gourmet meal at a top notch restaurant.

Apologies for my very unscientific analogies.

Interesting idea, I hadn't know about the continual ionization/reformation of the water. So the idea of catching the water at these key moments via our pulses could very well work. Need to think about it some more.

#### twohawks

• Newbie
• Posts: 25
##### Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #33 on: November 27, 2007, 08:56:50 PM »
@tao  Thank you (very much) for your post.  You know, I had read your positings on this somewhere else, but I didn't quite understand it all at the time (probably didn't have the full context as you placed here).  Now I get you, and I am very grateful for your following progress and thoughts here and posting your comments.  I find this very helpful, even if I feel FDay's feelings to be staying the course on certain considerations are very valid.

1 thought stands out in my mind with regard to your post... as I have run into a lot of info regarding votices while chasing this dragon, I have seen it suggested that possibly Meyers went with tubes due to the potential vorticular influence and how that may affect certain stresses and movement both in the mass of the medium and with the idividual molecules themselves.  Its a bit too complex for me to take on here, and I need to study way more, but based on what I loosely gather so far ...the considerations for acoustic resonance you describe would/could strongly relate in this regard.  There seem to be some folks out there really looking into this, but it seems that it is not very well studied as yet - but certainly very compelling.

-----------------------------------------------
So just to mention for anyone here (even preppies like myself)... please do not hesitate to air your considerations to the conversation - we never know where it may serve to help any of us to be getting a better leg up on the situation as things unfold.

@FD:  Wouldn't it be fair to say that Tao's consideration doesn't fall outside the scope of your intended focus considering its still an aspect of cell resonance, and that's under consideration here (even if its a little adroit in some characteristics)?

------------------------------------------------
@FD  Considering the high frequency required for pulsing the cell plates/tubes in the current scenario, and with regard to the question of electrode spacing that previously I posed, 4 things come to mind:
Either...
1) the spacing of the plates would not matter because the ion movement caused by the shifting charging states cannot travel that far anyway, or
2) the spacing of the plates as close as possible might be important with regard to affecting a certain "water tension state" (more on this in a moment), or
3) the spacing may be important to affecting how potential (for) arcing might be imposed, or
4) the deal with how spacing is managed is to do with something else.

Per # 2 and possibly #3 as well..., the reason that comes to mind is that in watching various videos having to do with related experiments I have noticed commonn situations where either points placed extremely close together underwater, or a point placed right at the surface of water (usually just touching, but neither held 'above' nor 'in' the water) creates a great deal of 'response' (usually arcing / sparking).  This response-propensity has been related by some to the qualities of water when laying thinly upon a surface, or at a body of water's own surface, i.e, how the molecules tend to line up in formation in these circumstances and how that also effects the potential [charge] state.
So it flashed in my mind Meyers' idea of maintaining water space at/as the thinnest possible sheet between two electrodes ...might be related to these observed phenomenon.
*I would be interested in comments on this.
-----------------------------------
Regarding:
water tends to convert back to molecules faster than it ionises, hence there will always be more water molecules than ions

Is the following the more accurate statement? ...reformation of water constituents (ions and electrons) back into water molecules takes less energy than does ionizing water molecules.
If so, then I question the last part "hence there will always be more water molecules than ions"... because I question... does "faster" necessarily mean "more"?
And I think that may depend largely on the 'state' water is in...
-------------------------------------
So then your next statement would make more sense to me...
What then if the high electrostatic field on the plates allows the water to ionise as usual, but then discourages it from reforming as water
...and the bright light and all that... really seems to be what is observed because a reaction does remain present, i.e., ions are displaced and, as gasses, they rise up.
---
Now this makes me think, so....  Are excess electrons liberated in the water during the ionization process, and what might that mean?  I am uncertain if I have seen this discussed(?).
I have to spend time to ponder that, but right off the top, if so then "in the moment of truth" wouldn't any excess electrons in the wash be (madly) rushing toward and amassing at the anode against the dielectric [chrominum oxide layer in the case of SS], creating a kind of "electrical vacumm" in the water... "choking" the water of its [excess] electrons so that, well I would think in an ideal(ly balanced) environment, there would only be ionized gasses left [with their 'attached' electrons only], O2's against and moving toward the cathode side, rising up as they move, and H2's against and moving toward the Anode side, also rising up.

I am just walking through it in my mind and wondering if I am envisioning this logically (or maybe even in the neighborhood of correctly - gods forbid!), and if it presents anything useful or not?   I would be interested in your thoughts and expounding on that description (taking it further).

-------------------------------
Cheers,
HTH

edited at 12:06pm pt

#### Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

##### Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #33 on: November 27, 2007, 08:56:50 PM »

#### Farrah Day

• Hero Member
• Posts: 556
##### Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #34 on: November 28, 2007, 12:33:58 AM »
Hi TH

There are no excess electrons in the water, liquid doesn't work like solids. Any electrons are either part of an atom or ion.

I think that if we build up too high a charge on closely spaced electrodes, or space the electrodes too closely, that there may be a real danger of plasma arcing. This would be undesirable as this action would certainly deplete the charges on the plates and create a massive current surge through the circuit. Therefore, we would actually want the dielectric to breakdown well before the electrostatic charge became high enough to cause arcing between the electrodes. A happy medium needs to be found.

I was not surmising about the water molecules reforming as water more readily than they ionise - the term 'faster' was probably misleading. However, this is a fact. Also a fact, is that water ionising is an endothermic reaction. As water molecules bump into each other, this can create the energy required to ionise, but that energy quickly dissipates and the ions reform as water. Ionising therefore requires additional outside energy to take place in any great numbers, as a result energy in the form of heat can be taken from the environment and hence the cell tends to run cold.  So TH, yes, ions reverting back to molecules takes less energy than ionisation.

My problem with the resonant frequency of the tubes, is that this frequency may be totally unrelated to the optimum frequency for the rest of the circuit.

Also, I now tend to think that Meyer's 'resonance' is a bit of a misnomer. His, so-called 'VIC' is actually a dc series resonant charging cct, like the ones used to drive Tesla coils. The circuit can't resonate because of the blocking diode, but it can double the supply voltage across our wfc. We certainly would not want to drive this circuit at it's resonant frequency as we would get the inductor reactance cancelling the capacitive reactance of our cell and the only thing left to restrain current flow through the cct, would be the resistance of the wire making up the coil.

No, the last thing we would want to do is find the resonant frequency of this circuit.  What would suit us much better would be to have quite a high frequency, as the inductor would then pose a very high reactance to the flow of electrons, while our water capacitor (in theory) would provide very little opposition. I say there, 'in theory' as in practice our water capacitor will not react like a normal capacitor at high frequency, because the ions in the water cannot react fast enough. Hence we still get out bottle-neck of charges on our electrodes.

My thoughts at present are along the lines of a highish pulse frequency in order to let the inductor work for us in inhibiting current flow through the cct, whilst still allowing a steady build up of charges on the electrodes.

One problem I am finding, is trying to relate our wfc as a capacitor to the functions of other capacitors. There seems to be no real, factual, information anywhere on this is, mainly expect because what we want our capacitor to do is not like anything you would normally want a capacitor to do.  We are in essence using a capacitor in a novel and not fully understood way.

#### Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

##### Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #34 on: November 28, 2007, 12:33:58 AM »

#### Farrah Day

• Hero Member
• Posts: 556
##### Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #35 on: December 01, 2007, 08:21:52 PM »
Some more thoughts for you guys to mull over.

When pulsing a square wave, unlike a sinewave where the voltage rises gradually, the square wave voltage is almost instantly at maximum. Now, across the resonant charging cct inductor, the voltage is 90 degrees out of phase with the current through it - the voltage leads, the current follows.  Now, if the tiny little fast moving electrons can't keep up with the voltage, the relatively massive bulky ion impurities in the tap water certainly will not be able to do so.

Therefore we have a voltage across our wfc before the electrons get there, and well before the ions get there. As this goes on, charges are accumulating on the electrodes, waiting to exchange charges with the ions in the water, but... the electons at the cathode (and +ve holes at the anode) will be gathering far more quickly than the ions. A bottle neck forms and the charges on the electrodes continue to accumulate until massive dielectric breakdown occurs.  At this stage, rapid ionisation of the water occurs and we get lots of gas, but as there is such an excess of charges on the electrodes, that no great surge of current through the electrical cct will occur.  We are simply using up these charges, while the rest of the electrical cct carrys on the charging process.  It will be important that the charges on the electrodes are not totally depleted, or else this would cause heavy current to be drawn through the electrical cct.

Hence, unlike normal dc electrolysis, the electrodes have an excess of stored charges, which can effectively be used before current is required to flow through the electrical cct. That is why a pulsed cct only draws a low current through the cct.

Here's an analogy:

Think of dc electrolysis as your house mains cold water supply running through to your kitchen tap. If you turn on the tap, that water mains pressure forces the water out. If however, you turn off the mains water supply at the stopcock, then no water flows when you turn on the tap.

Now think of pulsed electrolysis as your house hot water supply, where you have a storage (header) tank in the loft. Mains cold water is used to fill up the loft storage tank - like charging up a capacitor. Now again, you turn off your mains water at the stopcock, so no water can flow from in the cold water circuit. However, when you turn on your hot water tap and it will flow, and continue to flow until the storage tank empties, and during this time it requires no cold water supply, i.e, thanks to the storage tank, the hot water can flow for a time without drawing on the cold water.

Think of the voltage as the mains cold water pressure, the hot water storage tank as our 'water capacitor' and the hot water running with the mains cold water turned off as the exchange of charges between the ions and the electrodes.

Now, here is my thinking behind the signal pulses and components of the resonant charging cct.

Firstly, the main frequency pulse. We will want this to be quite high, as high frequency through an inductor will create a high resistance to current flow - hence the inductor acts as our natural current limiter.  Note: I'm dismissing all ideas of resistive wire to restrict current, as this would simply waste power, whereas an inductor will store energy and release it back into the cct with only a very small loss of power.

The modulation of the high frequency pulses. Now I've heard mention that this is used to control the gas output in order to accelerate/decelerate a vehicle. However, I don't think we have that to worry about yet. So I believe that more likely the modulation of the high frequency by a lower frequency is what provides the 'off' time that allows the dielectric to reform.

I emphasise that this is only my personal theory of operation, but to date, as far as I can tell it's the only one that has been put forward that offers any kind of scientific explanation to go along with it.

Feel free to respond with your thoughts.

#### twohawks

• Newbie
• Posts: 25
##### Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #36 on: December 02, 2007, 12:01:34 AM »
Hey FD,
Just letting you (all here) know I am reading, need time to assimilate, ...and very grateful for these posts.
Breifly, I initially find this analogy provocative.  If the logic holds, I wonder what that might indicate regarding cell tuning.

I expect I will not be able to participate for a spell... major business deadlines to attend to.  But be assured I will be following.

I hope some electronics and chemical geniuses show up to theorize and comment ;^)

Cheers,
HTH

#### Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

##### Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #36 on: December 02, 2007, 12:01:34 AM »

#### aussepom

• Newbie
• Posts: 45
##### Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #37 on: December 02, 2007, 12:15:38 PM »
Hi Tao

I am looking at this thread, with interest, with the thoughts back a few posts,
You were going into the acoustic effects it so happens I have been looking at this for some time, since you can not have electrical resonance in a DC circuit, but acoustic resonance of the tube could play a big part.
Now sound travel in water is called 'wave' and this is1600m per sec NOT 1435.
When you were working on the tube resonant frequency there was a few things not taken in to the calculations.
You need the thickness, and the length, and the free resonant frequency of the material.
Now if there are any fixture points or any thing else other than fresh water this will change.
In my opinion the only way to fine the F under water with any connection of any type made, is to do the test in its own environment.
Using a transducer such as an echo sounder, should be easily obtained if you go fishing, 'borrow it' from the boat.
You will need some thing a little more technical for the next bit.
You need two 'strain gauge' transmitters; these are special resistance strips, one for the vertical and one for the horizontal.
Fixed to the pipe in the centre, as described, a small voltage is applied and the voltage across each of the strain gauges is monitored on the Scope.
Using a sine wave generator connected to the transducer, sweep the frequency ranges close to you 'rough' calculation.
You will see the effects of any increased vibration changes on the strain gauges.
I am hoping to check this out later on my self.
Even when you find this frequency all the tubes need to be tuned to the same frequency.
Now you will then need to use a transducer at that frequency in the cell, you will not be able to do this through the electrical circuit connected to the cell circuit.
aussepom

#### raburgeson

• Hero Member
• Posts: 705
##### Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #38 on: December 04, 2007, 02:55:58 AM »
I think reactance in the cell is the word everyone is looking for. Do you think water will act as a dielectric? only if the water is scientifically pure, pure water doesn't conduct. A dielectric is an insulation.

#### Farrah Day

• Hero Member
• Posts: 556
##### Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #39 on: December 04, 2007, 12:17:54 PM »
That was short and sweet Rab.

No, 'reactance' is not particularly the word I'm looking for.

If you read through my various posts you'd see that I don't think that water is the dielectric, I think it is the chromuim rich oxide layer on the ss.   That said, tap water, not being the greatest of conductors, will likely allow a build up of charges on the plates as the large slow moving ions can't move through the water fast enough to deplete them all in one go during pulsing.

#### Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

##### Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #39 on: December 04, 2007, 12:17:54 PM »

#### Dr. Tesla

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 65
##### Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #40 on: December 17, 2007, 10:46:29 AM »
Hi all,

The circuit is a sham if only because meyer himself is talking about some quite opposing things. Such as dielectric water, resonant frequency of water molecule and impulses. Without going into to much details, please read his patents for these, the resonant frequency of water is in Giga Hertz range. Hence none of you out there has a chance in your lifetime to make a frequency generator that will produce desired frequency and safely break the water molecule with it.

Meyer in his last patent employs a laser in order to "enhance" water production and do what? Achieve "overunity"? Read his nonsense for yourselves:

www.waterpoweredcar.com/pdf.files/section3.pdf

Employing a laser means LARGE power is needed but, oh call me a sceptic, I can't see that happening in your car.

Between an american punk and a Russian scientist, I will trust more the Russian. Kanarev has proved scientifically that H2 overunity is achievable. And he gives enough information for a knowledgeable person to experiment further. Not me, I am not a scientist, unfortunately...So those of you who do have some knowledge, pull yourselves together and stop wasting your and our time. And when you do, do not forget to write your manuals and how-to's so that we non-techos can read and replicate your success.

#### Farrah Day

• Hero Member
• Posts: 556
##### Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #41 on: December 17, 2007, 07:18:40 PM »
Hi Doc

I totally agree with you that Kanarev looks to be a very reliable source of info, and is in a completely different league to that of Meyer.  Kanarev backs all his work up with science and relevant scientific equations - my kind of guy.

Yes, I've been over the Meyer Technical briefs and various patents many times and found them to be full of blatant errors. Errors of course, that are totally overlooked by the layman and those without sufficient grounding in science and electronics to know better. For me, Meyers lack of credibility is self-created as he clearly attempts to explain things that he does not understand. To anyone with a scientific background it is very transparent - Meyer created his own pseudo-science to fit his personal requirements and conveniently fill the gaps in his own knowledge.

At present, I firmly believe that there is nothing resonating in Meyers wfc cct. And, think that the term' resonance' is a Meyer misnomer that evolved due to the fact that he utilises a 'series dc resonant charging cct'.

All that said, if you cherry pick Meyers work and those people with similar wfcs and then cross-reference it to the likes of Kanarev, it is possible to find very interesting and useful info. The key is knowing what to dismiss as 'utter bullshit' and what to keep for further research and experimentation.

Personally, I like the Meyer tube cell setup and the high voltage pulsing, but would not trust a single word in any of his technical briefs or patents.

#### Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

##### Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #41 on: December 17, 2007, 07:18:40 PM »

#### Dr. Tesla

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 65
##### Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #42 on: December 18, 2007, 12:48:12 PM »
Hi Farrah,

True, there are interesting moments when reading Meyer, but as you say, one must sift through the gibberish. And Meyer produced a lot of it. I think he was putting together pieces from left and right, whatever he thought made sense in his scheme. And then tried to fish out a couple of gullible cash cows to fund his retirement plan.

I paid a real electronic engineer a couple of years ago to replicate Meyer's cell. It didn't work. My engineer explained it simply. Distilled water Meyer suggested in his first patents is not conductive enough to help sparks jump across, the frequency is to low to break the bond between the H2 and O2 atoms, current too is to low to break the water. The cell has to high resistance to be useful. It doesn't work as the capacitor, because the water cannot hold the charge well. Nothing works. It was disappointing and since then I am highly sceptic about everything that comes from a garage lab. Unless a claimant is highly trained professional in something, in my eyes he or she is just a liar or an idiot.

What formal training had Meyer in plasma, or physics, or chemistry? Given the rubbish he was dribbling about, none. Sadly, many a gullible person falls for the religiously (as in dogma - do not question. Just believe and open your wallet) constructed BS such evil people feed them with.

#### Farrah Day

• Hero Member
• Posts: 556
##### Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #43 on: December 18, 2007, 06:05:33 PM »
Couldn't have put it better myself Doc - we appear to be on exactly the same wavelength!

On other forums when I've spoke up like this I've had to endure heavy onslaught from the intellectually challenged Meyer worshippers and blind fanatics, but apart from the odd 'nutball' things do seem a little more sensible over here.

I'm researching from the ground up, as you've probably seen on my other 'Research and Development' thread.

From very basic test and measurements, the most interesting thing so far, is that my ss test cells hold a charge for hours after power is switched off and is nigh-on impossible to discharge quickly.

I've just constructed a square wave oscillator cct that fires a car ignition coil. Hope to pop this across my test cell in the next day or so and record the results.

Also, I've just about finished my D14 variable modulation squarewave oscillator, which will be getting its first outing over Christmas time.

#### Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

##### Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #43 on: December 18, 2007, 06:05:33 PM »

#### aussepom

• Newbie
• Posts: 45
##### Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #44 on: December 18, 2007, 07:46:29 PM »
Hi
Is your square wave positive pulse only, if so drive a trannie or a mosfet with at least 400 volt working, 600 is better,  run it at about 140 Hz  preferably with three 75v , at least 5w, zeners across it.  Take a good 12 volt supply that will give you up to 10 amps, let the trannie or the mosfet switch it.
You should end up with a spark that will jump a  1-1/12 inches, close the gap and it gets fatter. I know  I have two, the best car coil to use is the ones with dropping resistor, don't use that.  Don' go any lower than 100hz or you will blow the coil.
Be careful  mine gets up to 70 to 80,000 volts.
aussepom

#### Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

##### Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #44 on: December 18, 2007, 07:46:29 PM »