Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) 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:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: Relative Permittivity of Water  (Read 234700 times)

Torana

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 207
Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #210 on: June 14, 2012, 08:24:41 AM »
I already linked wire gauges ...Have you read this thread??
be specific...where did I lie??   conspiracy = I have put dictionary definition, very fitting too.
No where have I said Stan Meyers info is "textbook"   clearly I have linked to info , it is personal choice to learn and evaluate his "info".
What I have written is text book and theres a good reason for that , YOU missed it!
 
Any one can break down distilled water - try it- Ive already written about- Have you read this thread??
I HAD to google James Randi... am I supposed to know who magicians are?? He might be famous in someones world but not myn
 
Figured out the formula for Naphthalene yet?
Have you actually read SM info yourself or just skim and skip the top??
 
use the pdf search tool!    VERY easy to do

Torana

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 207
Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #211 on: June 14, 2012, 08:36:59 AM »
Tell you what,  why dont you go to ionizationx, RWG and T woodside and ask them if they have the "numbers" Eugene Mallove was asking from stan for.
 
while your there tell **THEM** " humans make mistakes like this , stan made too many of them"
heres links right here , dare to step up , why not go with the flow? ask away
 
http://www.ionizationx.com/index.php
 
http://www.open-source-energy.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=4
 
Are YOU armed with enough evidence to back up that statement and differentiate what those mistakes actually were?  while being specific at the same time.
 
Arent they the ones who NEED to know what info you pocess?
 
 

Torana

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 207
Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #212 on: June 14, 2012, 08:55:44 AM »
  "BUM Rate" is written with 3 capitals ....its rivetting stuff!  have you actually read the WFC tech Brief?
BURN rate has 4 capitals ....use the pdf search tool , aint no mistake.
 
Where have I been "whinning and complaining"??   be specific
 
what have I got to complain about and who to??
 
thats the 2nd time youve said it followed up with zip!
we both know you havent read this thread ....IT ...is text book info and theres a reason for that.
I have quoted SM word for word , no where have I ripped into SM,  try and find an example.
because I have no praise for him it must be stan bashing?
 
why is it intolerable for SM devotees to see this info on display?
It is complete freedom of choice , Ive put links every where...just have to move the mouse!
 
why has no one put a thread to up to back up SM tech brief to the fullest?   
 
Have you heard of Eugene Mallove or Walter Rosenthal?   essential figures and both dead!
 
James Randi, Penn and Teller or David Copperfield are irrelevent...hardly subject matter!
 
****What user name are you going by in ionizationx or RWG ??     Im interested how well your going to go down.  I personally cant wait till your 9XB turns up.
 
All the best , Pard'ner!

canufi

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 47
    • http://www.youtube.com/user/canufi
Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #213 on: June 14, 2012, 12:28:38 PM »
Tell you what,  why dont you go to ionizationx, RWG and T woodside and ask them if they have the "numbers" Eugene Mallove was asking from stan for.

I don't participate in those forums because they are full of buffoons including "h2opower" who is a racist american that thinks canadians are stupid, and that americans are smart. In fact quite the opposite: the southern jesus loving rednecks in the U.S.A. are stupid.
 
Are YOU armed with enough evidence to back up that statement and differentiate what those mistakes actually were? 

Look up the BWG system, Stan was using BWG instead of AWG and mixing and matching numbers where he shouldn't have.

I already told you to look at BWG but you just ignored it and kept rambling on about how you've provided the wire information. What you didn't realize was that there is a direct correlation to BWG figures with Stan's mistakes saying it was AWG.

Even if the guages of wires is off by a bit, this doesn't mean the fuel cell won't work, it would just be a different coil producing a different behavior.

The system can be scaled down to smaller wires or scaled up to big wires.




canufi

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 47
    • http://www.youtube.com/user/canufi
Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #214 on: June 14, 2012, 12:34:03 PM »

we both know you havent read this thread ....IT ...is text book info and theres a reason for that.

Obviously you aren't familiar with BWG text books (british wiring gauge) and SWG which humans can make mistakes about mixing and matching american gauge with british gauge.

I guess you just aren't smart enough to look at a Bwg gauge and compare it to AWG to see that Stan made simple mistakes. Yes he shouldn't have made the mistakes but at least they are obvious enough to solve.

It doesn't matter about the exact gauge of wire you use any way. It can be slightly different and still work.

You are smearing Stan because he made plenty of mistakes which is equivalent to criticizing a German for not knowing perfect English and using "vill" instead of "will".  Yes, it is annoying when humans make stupid mistakes. you make them too. Fool.

canufi

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 47
    • http://www.youtube.com/user/canufi
Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #215 on: June 14, 2012, 12:39:41 PM »
****What user name are you going by in ionizationx or RWG ??     Im interested how well your going to go down.  I personally cant wait till your 9XB turns up.

I don't participate in censored paranoid forums like that full of retards who think open source research should allow them free parts while people like myself pay for the parts with my hard earned money.  As an open source software contributor, I know open source to be mostly a scam. Mozilla Firefox developers for example are paid by companies, and it's not free software - it's subsidized communist software.  I'm not a fan of Richard Stallman and free software, and equally am not a fan of Free Open Source stan meyer groups who think parts should be donated to them for free. When these morons go to the grocery store they pay money for their groceries, but they expect electronics components to be free.

canufi

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 47
    • http://www.youtube.com/user/canufi
Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #216 on: June 14, 2012, 12:46:46 PM »
Have you heard of Eugene Mallove or Walter Rosenthal?   essential figures and both dead!

I know about Eugene Mallove because I started researching Stan  many years ago and have listened to all his material.

Stan was paranoid to let people like him see the information since Stan likely had Paranoid Schizophrenia and thought everyone was trying to steal his device from him.
 
James Randi, Penn and Teller or David Copperfield are irrelevent...hardly subject matter!

irrelevent? what are you smoking? are you on pot?

You realize you spelled another word wrong, you fool - it's spelled "irrelevant". So please stop making fun of Stan for his mistakes since you've been exposed as a bigger fool than Stan himself.

James Randi is extremely relevant since he can offer funding for this project. The first person that shows a 2HP generator running on water on its own in a closed loop with the water fuel cell plugged in to the generator, gets 1 million dollars from James Randi. James Randi said that Stan Meyer really did believe his device worked but James Randi claims it was a scam. However James Randi would happily give 1 million dollars to anyone that can prove Stan's device works.

1 million dollars is a way to fund the effort instead of all these poor open source losers screwing around with 10 dollars in their pocket.

canufi

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 47
    • http://www.youtube.com/user/canufi
Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #217 on: June 14, 2012, 12:49:20 PM »
He might be famous in someones world but not myn

What does "myn" mean you retard?

Does that mean "byn rate"?

myn rate?

Mine? Bum? Burn?

So you're a retard too, just like Stan Meyer! We should get James Randi to expose your spelling mistakes on his TV show. Torana is a fraud too! Because he made a spelling mistake!

Oh I'm whining and complaining like a little 3 year old girl. My name is Torana and I can'ter proparely spellls mine

Then there is h2opower, "for I, for I, for I have discovered the science, for I, well for I have explained the science behind Stan Mayers, for I, For I have discovered the science, for I."

For I!

What buffoonery!

Quacks and buffoons all over the forums.. James Randi would love to be here! He'd probably commit suicide if he had to visit these forums.

Torana

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 207
Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #218 on: June 15, 2012, 09:19:48 AM »
Ive said in this thread , I dont support open source,  did you read it?
Ive  also written about the spelling in this thread.....did you read that bit too?
 
****James Randi is relaphant 2 U and NOT Mi!
 
Do you know T woodside is one of the "Buffoons" (as you refer to) , is on on ionizationx ?
Alex petty- RWG ? (out standing actually!)
 
I am familiar with wire gauge= its part of the job!**
 
I have quoted SM word for word- and THAT is what I have responded to.
IF stan says AWG , HE is influencing alot of people.  eg; T woodside, G woodside, irondmax.............and there fore YOU!
 
Have you  told those guys the extent that you disagree with SM info?
ask them if they use a slide coil ?      Do YOU yourself intend to make a slide coil ? 
 
Where did I say SM fuel cell did not work?    be specific= name the date and post #
 
Where have I made "fun" of SM ?  thats YOUR judgement and perception, personally I have never met SM.
 
can you actually pinpoint if I am FOR or Against SM ?
 
So why ARE you attacking me?   ....and what with?     you havent presented anything!
 

Torana

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 207
Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #219 on: June 15, 2012, 09:31:51 AM »
Im not part of the RWG,ionizationx/T woodside Quack,Buffoonery,paranoid crowd....or ou.com either
Ive written of the mistakes in the info and film presented by SM...form the view point of an Electrician!
 
YOUR view point is what???
 
whats your level of understanding or EE theory , ANY practical experience??
 
Its YOUR responsibility to school yourself not  M I N E!  :-*  (dying to M Y N but thats not allowed)
 
So who do you call "WE" ?    you might find your just a cash paying customer.
 
What sparked this out burst?  ahh thats right  "unicorn coil"   FIG 1-1 VIC  = BOGUS!!
 
IF....or when you get around to it ...YOUR gonna find out 1st hand
 
 

Torana

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 207
Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #220 on: June 15, 2012, 09:38:32 AM »
Hate to be the 1 to break it to you but...H2Opower is using T woodsides circuit, no diff from irondmax....the same 1 YOU "intend" on using yourself, so you might as well cozy up to that thought..  bit of a twist there .....H2Opower built what you want to attempt.
Are you sure you want to call him a Buffoon?
 
Notice I didnt rip into him , or anyone else either!
And I dont see how you can label the guy racist .
 
personally I have never met the guy,  I thought he was canadian!

Torana

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 207
Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #221 on: June 15, 2012, 09:44:35 AM »
Here you go = this seems to be the foundation on which you stand , its all youve got!
 
http://www.free-energy-info.com/MeyerData.pdf
http://www.free-energy-info.com/P8.pdf
http://www.rtbot.net/irondmax
http://globalkast.com/documentation.htm
http://globalkast.com/products.htm
 
notice at the bottom..."All circuits are for experimental purpose only!"
 
....Do read that bit!
 
 

Torana

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 207
Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #222 on: June 15, 2012, 09:56:29 AM »
When you recover from your melt down , why dont you contact T woodside or irondmax and question the validity of the stock pile of SM info.  After all its your "Hard earned" money your gonna be spending
 
You could also take the opportunity to tell them Stans info is full of mistakes.....according to you!.
**maybe you could point out some examples to them, you didnt seem to share any with me!
....but then I dont think you had any, if you did, itd be pointless to react the way you have on this thread here.
 
As it turns out , your actually the SM basher but at the same time you intend to replicate ???
 
that must create alot of internal frustration to be carrying around.
 
How do you vent all that frustration ??  :-*

canufi

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 47
    • http://www.youtube.com/user/canufi
Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #223 on: June 15, 2012, 01:32:00 PM »
why dont you contact T woodside or irondmax and question the validity of the stock pile of SM info. 

Who says I'm not in contact with some people? Why do you presume that you're so much smarter than everyone else?

Why don't you contact them?

I've already contacted IronDMax about coil wire and enamel specs (certain coil wire will melt down if it doesn't have strong poly enamel coating on it) and Stan left some air space in his coil probably to prevent melt down.

The problem with people like IronDMax is they are believers in the technology and they don't want to do actual measurements, they just want to believe in the technology. I for example asked IronDMax to do some actual tests on the steam resonator to see how fast it heated up the water and am waiting for the response - but as they are believers in the technology, they likely don't much care.

Just because IronDmax and Woodside has done some good work, doesn't mean they are 100 percent scientists or 100 percent proper engineers willing to do proper tests.

After all its your "Hard earned" money your gonna be spending


Not really, I can turn around and sell all the components for more than what I paid for since I bought them in bulk and sell electronics parts as a hobby anyway.

You could also take the opportunity to tell them Stans info is full of mistakes.....according to you!.

It is full of many mistakes and Stan was also a Jesus freak which I am not afraid to bash him for.

Why would I waste time writing down all the mistakes here for you to see when you have an extremely condescending attitude? Why would I want to speak to someone like you who is condescending and obnoxious?

What will you gain from it if I provide you with my mistake information I've found?

for example one mistake is "voltage performs work". Actually, the molecules perform work, not voltage.

Are you building the devices or are you just here to be condescending? what are you gaining out of this if you aren't even participating in the 9XB builds? are you just here to complain about Stan because you don't have the skills to solder the circuits up? are you poor and can't afford them? If you aren't willing to waste the time buildling the circuits, why bother wasting your time on forums whining about Stan's spelling mistakes?

By the way you made some more spelling mistakes yourself you hypocritical fool.. you said "Form" instead of "From".

Really: look in the mirror before criticizing Stan. You sound like you are Stan Meyer yourself - all the spelling mistakes give it away.

....but then I dont think you had any, if you did, itd be pointless to react the way you have on this thread here.
 

You just made another mistake, you can't use apostrophe's correctly. ITD is not a word. dont is not a word.

Really, look in the mirror you hypocritical fool.

If you criticize Stan for spelling errors, and that's exactly what you do in your postings..... all I can say is:

hypocrite.
hypocrite.
hypocrite.
hypocrite.
hypocrite.
hypocrite.
hypocrite.
hypocrite.
hypocrite.
hypocrite.
hypocrite.

canufi

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 47
    • http://www.youtube.com/user/canufi
Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #224 on: June 15, 2012, 01:41:04 PM »
Notice I didnt rip into him , or anyone else either!
And I dont see how you can label the guy racist .
 
personally I have never met the guy,  I thought he was canadian!

Yes you did rip into him you liar. Some of his posts are deleted and strangely missing.  There was a point in the conversation where you quoted him and ridiculed him.

He is against Canadians and is racist toward Canadians.

His idea is that "they don't teach science up there".

It's exactly the opposite... they don't teach science "down there" in the more southern states where Creationism and Jesus prevails.