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: 11
• Guests: 204
• Total: 215

Author Topic: Relative Permittivity of Water  (Read 145918 times)

Torana

• Full Member
• Posts: 207
Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #60 on: May 28, 2011, 11:46:06 PM »
EQ 25; Ep / Es = Np / Ns  and  Ep / Es = Is / Ip   correct ( this indicates a step down transformer)

EQ 26;  T = Ns / Np                 correct ( this indicates a step up transformer )
" Turns ratio of VIC transformer (26/52)...each bobbin cavity adhering to EQ 20"  AIR CORE? ? ?

EQ 27; Z = T ^2                correct  ( N ratio = sq rt of Z )

EQ 28; M = La / 4              BOGUS  ( Lma = Lta - Lto / 4 ) ( + Lta = series aiding , -Lto = series opposing ) The next formulas are tied together.

EQ 29; Lt = 1 /  (1/L1+M + 1/L2+M)   BOGUS    Transformer Lt = L1 + L2 +/- 2M

Series L = L1 + L2 , Parallel + 1 / (1/L1 + 1/L2)without Mutual L .     Mutual L ;  M = sq rt L1 x L2  Or M = k sq rt L1 x L2 , k = coupling coefficient
http://www.daycounter.com/LabBook/Mutual-Inductance.phtml

EQ 30; Ltcc = L1 + L2 + 2M   choke coils  , correct  ( above)

Real time ....how I wish this wasnt happening .

Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #60 on: May 28, 2011, 11:46:06 PM »

Torana

• Full Member
• Posts: 207
Stanley A Meyers : SCIENCE SECTION
« Reply #61 on: May 29, 2011, 12:06:23 AM »
THIS HAS GOT TO BE THE ICING ON THE CAKE, THE RICH THICK CREAMY BIT..........

GASOLINE = C10 H8             BOGUS
C10 H8 =  NAPHTHALENE aka MOTHBALLS INSECTICIDE

http://www.chemspider.com/Chemical-Structure.906.html

NATURAL GAS = C5 H12         BOGUS
C5 H12 = PENTANE  ,the LIQUID

http://www.chemspider.com/RecordView.aspx?rid=95fe0516-eac9-4a79-8475-ca31155a0a44

H2

C  H4 methane
C2 H6 ethane
C3 H8 propane
C4 H10 butane     Natural gases

C5 H12 pentane
C6 H14 hexane
C7 H16 heptane
C8 H18 octane
C9 H20 nonane
C10 H22 decane
C11 H24 undecane
Gasoline = 5 to 11 carbon atoms per molecule.

Youll never see H2 at the top, it used to be called HYTHANE but an AMERICAN company snapped up the word .

Stanley A Meyers : SCIENCE SECTION
« Reply #61 on: May 29, 2011, 12:06:23 AM »

Torana

• Full Member
• Posts: 207
Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #62 on: May 29, 2011, 12:23:44 AM »
Heres the real kick in the balls , IF anyone /site , supports , encourages , promotes or uses Stans writtings as a source of reference or info towards free energy , they are in actual fact suppressing free energy , FREE of charge on BEHALF of the energy industry AND the shareholders.

The responsibility shifts to anyone who WAKES UP (reminds me of the matrix movie) once they KNOW the WFC tech brief is BOGUS , they can not un-KNOW it...

Anyone who continues (there will be) to use the tech brief is under self hypnosis and denial.

Stanley A Meyers knew his audience better than they knew themselves.

Do your self a favour and learn electronics, its dying out ,2 years ago Dick Smith electronics dropped its component range = NADA.  Other companies will follow.

So there it is ,in real time , STANLEY A MEYERS , \$35 a RIDE..... Ouch!!!

Torana

• Full Member
• Posts: 207
Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #63 on: May 29, 2011, 12:29:36 AM »
cutting edge, I didnt even spot that one , maybe I coulda shoulda done the same..thnx

Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #63 on: May 29, 2011, 12:29:36 AM »

Torana

• Full Member
• Posts: 207
Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #64 on: June 05, 2011, 03:39:27 AM »

Heres Stans   "memo WFC 420 "  - 214 page pdf ,  its the same and as good as " Birth of new technology" OR  " Water Fuel Cell Techical Brief " , and no doubt the same \$35 shafting fee ,plus postage.

For anyone who wants to double check stans formulas . All wording is by **STANLEY A MEYER**
not ME .

Pat Kellys site....
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/P8.pdf

**Collins Dictionary;

Deceive: to make (a person) believe what is not true

Pretence: A false show of something

Pretext: A false reason or motive put forth to hide the real one

Swindle: to get money or property from (another) under false pretences

? ? ?

Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #64 on: June 05, 2011, 03:39:27 AM »

Torana

• Full Member
• Posts: 207
Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #65 on: June 12, 2011, 12:47:09 AM »
Heres Stephen Horvarths 1976 Patent 3980053

http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/PatE12.pdf
http://www.stephenhorvath.com.au

Before Stan Meyer there was Henry Puharich and before him there was Stephen Horvath.
Horvath is the only one who is still alive.  He had a 1974 Ford Fairlane V8 sedan running on water.

Heres some notes on the circuit layout , which in basic form is a fullwave pulse gated by a SCR.

page 6 = fig 3 circuit
page 20 = component list
page 20 = Tr1 300 v @ 22 A ( try calculate input using ratio 18 : 1 , ...MUCHO ! ! )

- R1 and C2 = timers for UJT relaxation oscillator
- R2 and R3 = intrinsic stand off ratio
- UJT has saw tooth signal which is usually used directly triggering a SCR
- SCR = phase controller or if DC is used , switches off for any reason current stops
- C3 , R4 , Q2 , R5 , R6 , C4 , R7  are not necessary ( thats why theyre there)
- D1 and D2 are connected reverse to a normal fullwave rectifier
- R9 and R10 are permanent connected conductive path to earth
- Q3 and Q4 are connected opposite to a normal push pull centre tap primary
- Transformer TR2 secondary has an isolated parallel LC ....
...****  This completely rules out Electrolysis as an option of this circuit.*****

What does this patent cover ?  UJT ..2N3055.. ...D...C...R....frequency....electrolysis.....transformers...push pull...sawtooth ...fullwave...DC ripple...AC..passive components , active components ? ?

Patent title does not relate to patent circuit,  patent circuit does not match function of electrolysis,  Patent description does not explain non functional circuit.

The Horvath patent is one of the best examples , because of the detail, that shows that a patents  contents are not instructional and its not a manual or reliable source of info

Collins dictionary;

Patent = an official document granting the exclusive right to produce or sell an invention, process , etc

Manual = a handy book of instructions , etc

Torana

• Full Member
• Posts: 207
Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #66 on: June 19, 2011, 11:05:18 AM »
WFC International Independent Test Evaluation Report 1995 .

Another \$35 thank you very much...

Heres stan meyers 140 page pdf , WFC Project Binder 423-DA ,from pat kellys site.

http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/WFCreport.pdf

page 5     "Purpose of Content"

"establishing the dielectric value of water as being 78.54 ohms"

IF...there was a genuine independent report of the content of thse 140 pages , it would note that dielectric value of ANY substance is not measured in OHMS, relative permittivity has no units , its a ratio.
Resistance is not a dielectric value...........establish this first.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_(data_page)

http://www.ozh2o.com/h2phys.html

page 20 ; figure AA = V I C  .  "water dielectric value 78.54 ohms"

This diagram is invalid simply because of this Resistance measurement.

page 22; figure 8XA = V I C diagram

page 23; figure 8XA1 = V I C AA         ( typical parallel allude)

page 24; figure 9XD = Voltage regulator PC9XD card

page 25; figure 9XB = Variable pulse generator

The basis of this circuit is a fullwave rectifier with a SCR gate with a trigger circuit = 555 based
The Horvath circuit is a fullwave rectifier with a SCR gate with a trigger circuit  = UJT based

The question is ....How does a SCR switch off ? ?

Page 64;  C5 H12    Molecular Structure of Natural Gas .                  =  ( B O G U S )

What independent evaluation would allow this to slip by unnoticed ? ?

http://www.chemspider.com/RecordView.aspx?rid=c7675b45-9ebb-4a5a-b6a4-75696d906f90

This is PENTANE , the liquid .

There are affidavits throughout about SS304 , plexiglass, water samples , people building their own renditions + witnesses.
There is no over all independent test evaluation of his circuit + its function ,that would breach confidentiality.
People need to do their own evaluation of stan meyers info instead of stans independent evaluation of himself
This file has no value at all.

Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #66 on: June 19, 2011, 11:05:18 AM »

Torana

• Full Member
• Posts: 207
Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #67 on: June 26, 2011, 11:11:55 AM »
WFC memo 420 page 1 !! ....    Stan Meyers words not MYN

"the dielectric properties (insulator to the flow of amps) of natural water ( dielctric constant being 78.54 @ 25c) between the electrical plates (E1/E2) form the capacitor (ER).
Water now becomes part of the VIC in the form of "resistance" between electrical ground and pulse frequency positive-potential_ helping to prevent electron flow within the pulsing circuit (AA) of fig 1-1" *****(fig 1-1)

The first sentence uses the word insulator ,the second sentence uses the word resistance.
A capacitor is not "resistance"  ,  Impedance = frequency dependent , zero freq= open ,
open = zero current.

1; fig 1-1 VIC (AA) parallel circuit .    section 1 page 13

2; memo 429 fig 10-1 ,    970 VIC  sect10 page 9 "water dielectric value 78.54 ohms"
****within the same pages of "birth of new technology"

3; WFC International Independent Report page 20 ,fig (AA) VIC "water dielectric value 78.54 ohms"
****same diagram as memo 429 fig 10-1

4; WFC International news release issue 11 A 1996 ,page 9
-970 WFC VIC  "water dielectric value 78.54 ohms"
**** same diagram as memo 429 fig 10-1

http://www.icubenetwork.com/files/watercar/non-commercial/stanley_meyer/News%20Release.pdf

***Fig (AA) VIC = Fig VIC (AA) = Fig 1-1

...remembering "dielectric constant 78.54 @25c" ..then diagram "water dielectric value 78.54 ohms"

Does Stan Meyers first statement nullify fig 10-1 and fig (AA) because theyre measured in ohms or does fig 10-1 and fig (AA) over ride his statement ?      ( how ? )

They cant both be right , ones a fact and the other is NOT.
This has influenced alot of people who dont know the difference, which cant be blamed on them but it seems to have set like concrete.

Torana

• Full Member
• Posts: 207
Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #68 on: June 26, 2011, 11:30:36 AM »
Heres another one ......

http://www.icubenetwork.com/files/watercar/non-commercial/stanley_meyer/News%20Release.pdf

1; WFC International news release issue 10 1994 page 6
"analysis of water "dielectric value of water 78.54 ohms"

2; Birth of new technology WFC , section 7 page 24 , fig 7 - 15
760 "thermal explosive energy of water "  , "dielectric value of water 78.54 ohms "

These are the same diagrams under different headings .

** R and D laboratories , a certified biological testing laboratory, columbus ohio.
Test method = Spectrophotometer analysis
contaminates= sodium (NA) and potassium (K)

http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectrophotometer

The samples are measured ,Parts Per Million = ppm , NOT explosion rates or OHMS ...its a biological testing lab ,........that may or may not have existed .
No Lab any where will measure a dielectric constant in OHMS , this is Stans manipulation .

Torana

• Full Member
• Posts: 207
Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #69 on: July 03, 2011, 11:40:01 AM »
SIMPLE EXPLANATION OF MEYERS FUEL CELL TECHNOLOGY , Rea Oneill , DUBLIN .

http://jnaudin.free.fr/wfc/WFCexpl.pdf

page 1, 2; affidavit of his visit 28-7-93 , Rea Oneill ,If anyone wants to try and find him Im sure hes not bound by any confidentiality agreement....any more.

http://www.dit.ie/tools/contacts/departments

page 3, 4, 5, 6; Explanation of Meyer fuel cell,  Oneills theory of WFC operation.
5 khz superimposed on field coils and 1/2 wave rectified to allow the capacitor to discharge?.
(1/2 wave being 50 % )

page 7 to 10; Appendix 1, Haber cycle etc
page 11; The Helium atom + diatomic molecules  pg 521

page 12; Appendix 2 , Electrical current
Similar to forced oscillations circuit described in text and designed to maximise.
1; Field coils = 5 v , 2 amp
2; Alternator driven by 2 KW motor
3; Inductance = unknown
4; Condenser = formed from 8 - 10 , 1/2 inch SS tubes surrounded by 3/4 inch SS tubes wired in parallel **     { C = obviously UNKNOWN }

page 13; Capacity + Inductance pg 685
page 14; Electrical oscillations pg 686

According to Oneill , the caps are wired parallel, IF... Oneill is correct, does that mean the 'series cap guys' are wrong OR IF the 'series cap guys' are right ,does that make Oneill an unreliable witness?
Page 2 is Oneills affidavit of his visit and personal impression of stans character.
page 3, 4, 5, 6 is Oneills personal theory/explanation of WFC without measurements.

At the end of the day his theory is as good as anyones guess, and its back to the drawing board...

Basically theres nothing else on stan meyer I can find , years ago I had the NZ pack but that went up in flames .....trying to extract something from it .   I live where the NZ video was filmed .

Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #69 on: July 03, 2011, 11:40:01 AM »

Torana

• Full Member
• Posts: 207
Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #70 on: July 10, 2011, 04:48:30 AM »
http://www.alexpetty.com

This guy keeps himself busy long time , well worth checkimg out.  Got to respect the guy he transcribed stans Denver 97 video. Ive been through stans videos thru the years and theyre pretty much rehash/ presentation but this ones got MALLOVE.
What stands out in all his videos , stan repeatedley said hes a BUSSINESSMAN .

19:49. "now the technology of using water as fuel was actually invented and developed through the eyes of a BUSSINESSMAN. Under the law of economics the guy who comes up with the cheapest way is going to win out. You know there are alot of Cadillac ideas that come into existance but they dont apply the law of economics and they never really get out the door"

Does it make good bussiness to give away intellectual property ?
"        "          "             to  release a circuit diagram for \$35 ?
"        "          "             to reveal circuit design / function in a patent ?

IF the answer is NO ,then all of stans available info has nothing of value in it, the bussinessman was NOT selling the bussiness , certainly wasnt giving it away.
Ive made notes from the video...

Torana

• Full Member
• Posts: 207
Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #71 on: July 10, 2011, 05:11:12 AM »
NOTE; STAN MEYERS WORDS FROM HIS MOUTH ,  NOT A. PETTY AND CERTAINLY NOT ME.

03:23 " I just simply asked the prayer to GOD ,I said -GOD I love my country ,its the greatest country in the world: I have been all over the world, if YOU will help ME put a power supply in the country Ill do anything YOU want to do" and subsequently I was filled with Holy spirit , I exercised all the gifts of the Holy spirit and this is how Ive been bringing the technology in"

fig 12 = BOGUS = 78.54 ohms 8XA
fig 17 = BOGUS = 78.54 ohms , Analysis of water
fig 48 = BOGUS = 78.54 ohms 8XA (fig 12 )

20:41 " now we got into a very interesting part is that when we tune into the dielectric value of water you go into atomic resonance"

-dielectric value is permittivity or a constant, what about
"tune into the dielectric value of GLASS ,you go into atomic resonance"? ?   Air = 1, glass = 5-10 mica= 3-8 paper= 3.5, water=78.54,  its a RATIO, theyve all got values.  Its been used to confuse,and it has.

27:21 " creativity comes from GOD- if its beneficial for mankind- and I just simply asked a prayer to GOD , If YOU show ME a way , I love my country, its the greatest country in the world, Ill do anything YOU want ME to do"

In hind sight GOD obviously didnt want stan to show us too , OR maybe GOD did and stan made the wrong deal with the wrong dude.

Wonder if stephen meyers made the same deal/ prayer ...

Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #71 on: July 10, 2011, 05:11:12 AM »

Torana

• Full Member
• Posts: 207
Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #72 on: July 10, 2011, 05:38:42 AM »
29:05 " we neede to PROTECT the military integrity of the US"         (? ? define integrity.)

32:45 "the Lord says to ME -we have eyes but we do not see, we have ears but we do not hear"

45:56 " we are tuning the dielectric value of water and this acts as an amplifier that allow the electrical stress to be amplified and compressed and this allows us to oscillate the water molecule atom"

-A microwave oven is allowed to oscillate molecules ....   "the dielectric value" ? ?
you dont tune "IT" ...."IT" is a constant , again, what about , Air= 1 , glass = 5- 10 ,mica= 3-8
etc .   With LC circuit ,you find the frequency of natural oscillations, you can even use an L C selection chart.

51:06 , 35 USC 101 code in the US patent office

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_35_of_the_United_States_Code

Does that mean show operability therefore you dont have to reveal HOW it works ,just that it does?  so even the patent office doesnt know.

OH LORD NOW ITS GETTING INTERESTING...

***51:54 "WE (?) can demonstrate the technology, we can say its here but in actuality IT WILL NOT BE STAN MEYERS to bring it in. It will be either you or I, the guy down the street who will come together to bring it in.
Otherwise I DO NOT BELIEVE AN ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOURCE WHEITHER WFC OR OTHER WOULD EVER COME IN.   Its going to be mandated by the people to try to reverse the environmental problems, the environmental damage nthats actually occurring"

-Excellent- make a deal with GOD and then shift responsibility on to the peasants, that sounds familiar, its the peasants who fund the war  ( military integrity) ,its the peasants who foot the bill.
At the end of the day 'WE' are over spending so up goes inflation and tax.

Torana

• Full Member
• Posts: 207
Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #73 on: July 10, 2011, 06:01:01 AM »
** Stan said the technology isnt comming out.       as of may 1997

So does that clearly indicate that the Tech Brief is NOT in any way an instructional manual/ diy kit as most want to believe ? ?
People have committed years of thier lives to that thing       (probably longer = prediction)

Does that clearly indicate that he did not release a circuit ? ?

So what are all these "replications" of ?     DC or DC pulse , fullwave or 1/2 wave , In phase or out of phase, RESONANT ? -thats AC, who said it was resonant ? ...rectified = 1/2 wave.

**55:38 "Stan Im EUGENE MALLOVE .....(Independent Energy magazine)
"If you will just do one thing: Just let us test it , will you allow us to test it? "

57:26  " Where are the numbers ?.. thats what I want to see "

57:57 "I AM NOT WILLING TO VIOLATE MY DEVELOPEMENT RIGHTS TO REDUCE IT DOWN TO PRACTICE"    as of may 1997

-NO testing, NO description, NO circuit released , NO relevant info released into the public domain , its locked away for a long time.

He said ,51:06,  "the scientific community " tested it ?    Does that violate his developement rights prior to may 1997 ?

Obviously Eugene Mallove had a hard time finding any datd anywhere, theres a good chance there never was any tests.

Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #73 on: July 10, 2011, 06:01:01 AM »

Torana

• Full Member
• Posts: 207
Re: Relative Permittivity of Water
« Reply #74 on: July 10, 2011, 06:27:24 AM »
STANLEY A MEYERS, " I DO NOT BELIEVE AN ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOURCE WHEITHER WFC OR OTHER WOULD EVER COME IN"
"IT WILL NOT BE STAN MEYERS TO BRING IT IN"   as of may 1997

How people couldnt hear these words years ago , shocks me.   He said it .  No doubt itll hit a few people when they double check. Some wont.

So not even GOD could make him do it, thats a bussinessman to the bitter end. Who suppressed WFC ?
Who suppressed Yull Brown ?       = Yull Brown
"       "        Stephen Horvath ?=  Stephen Horvath
"       "        Henry Puharich ? = Henry Puharich
"       "        Stephen Meyers ?  = Stephen Meyers
"       "        Stan Meyers ? = Stan Meyers
"       "        John Kanzius ? + John Kanzius

Reading thru Stans info and videos , NOWHERE could I find Stan promoting/ advocating the concept or objective of INDIVIDUAL INDEPENDENCE /FREE ENERGY , that only encourages the whole system to collapse = economic suicide, Bad bussiness and bussinessmen dont like that at all.

He said " you have to maintain the industrial-economic base and the integrity(?) of the military"
Does that include civilian contracts, black water, reconstruction, covert corruption, market stimulation ?
On the fundamental level , Protect the share holders interests, screw the workers.

Gov, military and industry are the same thing . GM bail out is a classic example...nicely done ,well executed (executive)
Tax payers/consumers are the HOST, no system can allow individual independence, its social engineering/structure/natural order/ the economic pyramid.

Stan said he was a BUSSINESSMAN not an inventor... and its bussiness that got him in the end and put him in the ground.  Live by the sword, die by the sword , it sounds like divine justice.

Pass the ammo, if theres any left...