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: 5
  • *Guests: 219
  • *Total: 224

Facebook

Author Topic: Stan Meyers tech experimenters please help  (Read 12012 times)

Offline CrazyEwok

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 191
Stan Meyers tech experimenters please help
« on: September 04, 2009, 06:42:03 AM »
Stan Meyers concept of separating water using only the voltage and minimal current (only current used is the inevitable leakage). Has anyone actually tested this? i know many have had their attempted replications and tend not to work as expected. My question is has anyone literally tested his theory of increasing voltage with minimal current? if so what voltage levels did you use. what effects did you observe. What current leakage did you have.
As a standard i would also like to know if you used tap water or distilled. Also if you added any e/lyte.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline dankie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 463
Re: Stan Meyers tech experimenters please help
« Reply #1 on: September 04, 2009, 05:36:48 PM »
The Stan Meyers thing dont work , its not a workeable design .

Most people now are experimenting with my master oscillator for the hydroxyl refilling patent . Wich is about 5 times more efficient than an alternator to get thois waves going .

Ofc it costs $ , its my intellectual property .

Or you can just monkey around with 2 alternators .




Offline HeairBear

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 440
Re: Stan Meyers tech experimenters please help
« Reply #2 on: September 05, 2009, 05:13:56 AM »
The Stan Meyers thing dont work , its not a workeable design .

Most people now are experimenting with my master oscillator for the hydroxyl refilling patent . Wich is about 5 times more efficient than an alternator to get thois waves going .

Ofc it costs $ , its my intellectual property .

Or you can just monkey around with 2 alternators .

LOL, you have got to be kidding me! On what basis do you make this claim?

Offline dankie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 463
Re: Stan Meyers tech experimenters please help
« Reply #3 on: September 05, 2009, 06:07:44 AM »
As for the efficiency claim , I base my claim on the basis that if you run an alternator at 3000 rpm , you are using a motor , 1 h/p = 747 watts . You have to pay not-only for the motor driving the alternator but also but also the current going in the cell .

Synthetizing with a few millamps and the losses occured in the transistors as heat with the amplification stage is the only loss . You pay less for your excitating wave . In the end , it costed you less electricity to make that gas , tuned resonant OU cell or not .

Also not to mention the limited frequency wich such a mechanical drive device , frequency is resonance , resonance is efficiency .

As for the claim that Stan's design are maybe not so complete and perfect , Stephen confirms that himself in an interview .



Offline HeairBear

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 440
Re: Stan Meyers tech experimenters please help
« Reply #4 on: September 05, 2009, 07:26:23 AM »
The Stan Meyers thing dont work , its not a workeable design .

Let' start with this sentence. This is the big one. I don't ever recall Stephen producing any demonstrable device, let alone a water powered car. Stan's devices worked just fine, your inability to replicate his work does not mean his designs do not work. The rest of your post is invalidated by the first sentence, so, I need not make further argument. Your second post has some merit, but, it misses the point of the subject altogether.Your cutting your own throat dankie. That filling station bit is just an application, he was never granted a patent. The incompleteness Stephen spoke of in the interview was pertaining to the drawings. They are made that way on purpose for obscurity. I find it rather odd that you have come to your conclusions from a telephone interview and a patent application. Not so long ago you were claiming that Stan used stainless steel wire exclusively and you were trying to sell it at the same time. What happen to that? No one bought it did they? The same will be for your intellectual property, or is it really Stephen's?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Stan Meyers tech experimenters please help
« Reply #4 on: September 05, 2009, 07:26:23 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline dankie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 463
Re: Stan Meyers tech experimenters please help
« Reply #5 on: September 05, 2009, 08:41:48 AM »
Yeah I tried the ss vic , I made it , it didnt work , I am dissapointed very much .

Ok so Stan made it work , but I cant follow his instructions and make it work , so I'm trying the brother now . Maybe his technique is better , it is certainly better explained , I really dont care if its an app or patent stage . This is pretty major stuff here so it might havea few hurdles .




Offline CrazyEwok

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 191
Re: Stan Meyers tech experimenters please help
« Reply #6 on: September 05, 2009, 08:56:05 AM »
Dankie... re-read my post... in fact re-read every post i have ever made and you will see one thing... I am interested in facts and specifics... I asked a specific question "if anyone had tested high voltage and minimal to no current" and if they had what was their results... not what you and your perspective team is currently doing i am not concerned with and if i wanted to know i would of asked... so direct question have you done the test/s with scaling voltage up to a point where it produces an effect? (there will always be an effect eventually regardless... if you push it far enough) from your answer (or lack there of) i would say you spent all of your efforts on your coils and when they didn't work you claimed scam... as i kept saying to you where is your ground work, when ever you were claiming you followed Stan to the letter??? you only relied with words of blind following claiming some breakthrough... <sigh> yet another fanatic following something blindly with out doing any ground work... no wonder this technology is a laughing stock... 3 things for you to remember...
If something is going to happen on a large scale you won't hit the most efficient point straight off the bat, and the concept will work on any scale with the right variables/conditions. (variables and/or conditions are the things that you need to play with).
Test small take result if favourable expand/enlarge. If not favourable redesign/re-look at design/concept (we are all human there may of been a mistake made or something over looked)
Take every idea from external sources with a piece of salt. Attempt to implement it into the design and look at possible co-effects.

So back to the question in the Original statement...

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Stan Meyers tech experimenters please help
« Reply #6 on: September 05, 2009, 08:56:05 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline dankie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 463
Re: Stan Meyers tech experimenters please help
« Reply #7 on: September 05, 2009, 09:31:38 PM »
CrazyEwok , I will answer your question .

There is always electron leakage , the only way to stop that is with a very high resistance coating material . That will give you HV across the gap space but does not produce gas . Me and many others went down this route , its not it . Me and my colleagues have went down all the roads .We are quite "tired" now , and there is only one road left to go before we call it quits and accept our "slave status" .

Its the offseting phase and current that produces gas , you dont need amazing high voltages to see the Meyer effects , as confirmed by Stephen Meyers in the phone interview .

As you may already know , I always planify myself a financing strategy , i had big hopes for the ss VIC but that didnt work ,it was quite an expensive and troublesome coil , I only built one . I simply lak the knowledge in complex electromagnetic coils and resonance , I am more a "eletronics guy" . I have built many circuits during the summertime , I made my own version of the hex controller , a perfect pulser pwm , and a 200watt 3 phase AC pure sine driver/oscillator . I am a small electronics hobbyist like I said but I am faster than most electronic engineers that I know , I see the solution of w/e given task rather quickly .

I fused all my work on a pcb and selling it for 350$ . It is unique research equipment that is equivalent to 1000$ radio equipment . It is the last and final things to try before calling it quits and moving on with our lives . Re-looking @ the impedance matching network as shown in the hydroxyl refilling patent .

Do not waste your $ on any other experiment , me and my colleagues tried , It was the best amateur research group in history,  there was much knowledge , much discipline in our group  , many thousands of dollars spent and countless hundreds of hours testing and re-coiling and so on ... There was never a real emphasis on wavelenght matching of the trodes and impedance matching tho , it was mostly trial and error .

Offline HeairBear

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 440
Re: Stan Meyers tech experimenters please help
« Reply #8 on: September 06, 2009, 01:17:08 AM »
I myself fall in the category of failed attempts and such. I would have to say I did learn from my mistakes and I have not given up quite yet like so many who come through this forum. Before the independent study pdf came around, I had already been researching with the Lawton circuit and cell with poor results. That document has the actual diagrams and pictures showing the equipment inside and out. It's a no brainer to follow and the circuits are very easy to build. Yet no person has built it. Like myself, most get hooked by the Lawton stuff and all the other myths running around making it an endless puzzle. Well, now I hope to use my better judgment this time and go for the real deal instead of following everyone else. Here are pictures for comparison... What do you think is the right diagram to follow?

Offline dankie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 463
Re: Stan Meyers tech experimenters please help
« Reply #9 on: September 06, 2009, 06:20:49 AM »
The grounded cell in chapter 8 is the same design Stephen uses .

triple tubes with the middle reference tube.

But Stephen perfected it , he made it solid state and more efficient . It is possible to use a transformer with his method .

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Stan Meyers tech experimenters please help
« Reply #9 on: September 06, 2009, 06:20:49 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline CrazyEwok

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 191
Re: Stan Meyers tech experimenters please help
« Reply #10 on: September 06, 2009, 03:58:41 PM »
i know many have had their attempted replications and tend not to work as expected. My question is has anyone literally tested his theory of increasing voltage with minimal current? if so what voltage levels did you use. what effects did you observe. What current leakage did you have.
As a standard i would also like to know if you used tap water or distilled. Also if you added any e/lyte.

I just love it how i ask for data and the limitations of your experiment and all i get is "take my word for it" and "me and others did this and that" as i said yes you had experiments with little to no success but either due to your lack of documentation or your equipments limitations you still have not given me anything that i asked for but still assume i am talking about some direct correlation between what i would like to know and what you think i want to know... I didn't ask for your opinion on what works i asked about peoples results and the limitations of their experiments... Did you go to 40,000 V and 5mA ? did you go to 500v? "With 60W at 300V i saw very small bubbles..." "i lowered the amps to 1am and then increased the voltage in 20v blocks up to 200v and started to notice production at 150v, but there were far to many sparks between the plates"  these are the kinds of answers i am looking for...

Quote from: Thomas A. Edison
I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work.

Offline dankie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 463
Re: Stan Meyers tech experimenters please help
« Reply #11 on: September 06, 2009, 10:03:51 PM »
Yeah you should "take my word for it" .

I go @ ionizationx , where all the "testers" are . For every pointless little comment you made , theres a guide on something related to HHO over there . Theres people who know more than you and have more experience and tried more than you , Do you seriously think you are better than the members theres ? Stevie recently put a setup that he found was the best working in all the plethora of things he tried , the VIC pictures were first released there , all the circuits that hydrogen garage sells were posted there ,  before anywhere else . I am not even the best @ eletronics over there...

This is not dependtard overunity.com filled with posers with an attitude who have no hands on experience @ anything , a bunch of arm-chair-ists  who know more about TPU mumble talk than actually calculating a simple electronic circuits ...

When I claim that "we went down that road" , we did , we posted it there , we had a discussion about it  . And odds are that you will come to the same conclusions , unless you have some very heavy experience and skill and tools for that matter or just pure luck lol ...

So if you are stubborn , make sure you are a dam smart researcher and well equipped with electrnics measurement and have good methodology and "handy skills" . You are gonna need to learn to make your own tools and find ways to save $ .

If all you wanna do is find something to save $ , make a big GEET , make a bubbler . It will save you more than a 3 volt jules thief  and magical daydreaming TPU . And once you have mastered that , make it for your neighbors and come buy my master oscillator for further research on the Meyers system , because there is no further research at this moment to be done .







Offline CrazyEwok

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 191
Re: Stan Meyers tech experimenters please help
« Reply #12 on: September 07, 2009, 06:48:11 AM »
<yawn> still no actual helpful information just more jaw yappin... and assumptions... Nevermind Dankie go back to your little world...

Offline CrazyEwok

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 191
Re: Stan Meyers tech experimenters please help
« Reply #13 on: September 09, 2009, 12:31:23 PM »
Ok dankie here is ur chance to prove me wrong... you say you built the coil exactly as Meyers stated... what was your coil ratio and how high was your output voltage / current?


Offline CrazyEwok

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 191
Re: Stan Meyers tech experimenters please help
« Reply #14 on: September 14, 2009, 05:08:48 AM »
since its been almost a week now and you havn't responded one can only assume u do have nothing... or didn't take notes on your own experiment...
Let me Summarise for you some facts...
Dielectric breakdown of water happens at 65-70 MV/m
Avalanche Breakdown happens at ~70MV/m - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avalanche_breakdown

But dankie did his research and knew this didn't you dankie? You didn't just follow some set out instructions blindly... This is why we should "just take your word for it"

What this means is you need a minimum voltage of 70,000 volts per mm of gap between your electrodes. There is no mention of current required for this... Which means that as long as the potential is there (to accelerate the electrons) you only need 1 loose electron to start the process and "the number of free electrons is thus increased rapidly as newly generated particles become part of the process" as once they become free they are accelerated in the HV field... Now your maticulas coil windings i doubt had a 1:6000 (thats if efficientcy of coils was almost 100%) rating... so i don't think you had the voltage to do the job... So again people trying Stans idea what sort of output did you have and what was the gap between your electrodes? (also please note that this only applies to HV distilled water)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Stan Meyers tech experimenters please help
« Reply #14 on: September 14, 2009, 05:08:48 AM »

 

Share this topic to your favourite Social and Bookmark site

Please SHARE this topic at: