Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

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

Google Search

Custom Search

Author Topic: Stanley Meyer replication with low input power  (Read 785784 times)

Offline sparks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2528
Re: Stanley Meyer replication with low input power
« Reply #1260 on: May 27, 2012, 07:38:52 PM »
You didn't answer my question.

When the single electron on the Hydrogen atom is already in the lowest band how can it oh well who cares anyway.

When Stan's cell breaks down at the end of the pulse train this is similar to when a gas gets ionized and becomes conductive.
This has got nothing to do with the cell's capacity dumping back it's energy into the source circuit.
The thing is that you know this when you have build this because then you know the gas comes out at these silent intervals between the pulse trains due to the water breaking down.

So you have either your own view on the mechanism but have not tried it yourself, or you do not completly understand what it is about.
But there is no need to discuss this any further since Stan left us with a great deal of information for those who want to take a stab at it.
Like i did and i hope more will follow since this is about the best documented invention available for researchers who want to work in the Hydrogen field.

I have switched to electric driving so i'm now loking into effecient way's to generate electricity otherwise i would still be on the Hydrogen wagon.
The biggest issue was the water condensing in the engine creating rust iside the cilinders which is why it has to rune about every day or the engine and it's pistons will get stuck due to this oxidation.
And i got tired spraying oil into the ciliders turning the crank by hand to protect the metal inside.
   I will stand out of the way for anyone who is replicating stan's device.  What I don't care to do is see people wasting time and rescources on such things as expecting current induced fracturing of water to somehow allow an engine to run on water.  The only energy supplied to the cell is the pulse train charging of the cell.  This creates an electric FIELD between the capactior metals.  The input energy is therefore conserved in some degree in the charging of this capacitor.
There is no need for current to short the cell in order for the fracturing process to occur.  The effects of the variable intensity of the accelerating electric field between the plates (tubes) is what fractures the water without electron infusion into the water.  A charged particle accelerated through an electrolyte carrries with it an electric field.  This electric field disrupts the water bound electrons and produces water fracturing, in a classical electrolysis process.  This is a very inefficient way to induce varying electric fields into anything.  You will also notice that the circuit employed is a tunable series resonant one.  Transformer secondary with an inductor and 1/2 a capacitor in each leg.  I've seen this circuit many times utilized by Tesla to power his primaries and his patents on improved method of electrical energy transfer.  Unfortunately Tesla had to rely on spark gaps acting as zener diodes to introduce the input power needed to maintain his primaries in resonance.  In fact Myer's whole setup is a modern version of Tesla's ozone generator.  Again in an ozone generator there is no current between cell walls.  There is capacitave demands to charge and recharge the plates and resistive losses in the circuit.  These demands are minimized by driving the circuit at resonance.  The voltage appearing across the cell is purely reactive.  In a closed circuit analysis it is wattless.  The voltage is totally out of phase with the current.  This is a good thing otherwise all of the input energy would be dissipated in the resistance of the circuit where voltage and current occur in phase.  The dielectric constant of the capacitor will vary.  Myer stated that his engine didnt need distilled water to run on.  He developed feedback loops that sensed the capacitance and varied the inductance so as to maintain the circuit in resonance.  (normal circuitry employed in all tuners and transmitters to avoid drift due to variance in circuit components including antennae and near field capacitance-component heating-parasitic capacitance-etc.)
    Unfortunately the hydrino theory relies on a complete remodeling of the atom.  This work has been performed,  I don't have the rescources to proove that such an atom exists.  This work has also been done and ongoing.  There is spectral line "widening"  upon examination of the atoms suspected to be hydrinos.  This suggests a large number of subshells below the s.  The bohr model is only a model.  Normalization of the equations used to create this model defines an area of interest and does not hinder nature in it's activity.  The s orbital could be supported by thermal photon exchange between an electron oscillating between a suborbital and the s.  The spectral line "widening" points towards the thermal  photon having it's energies in the soft ultraviolet range.  Proponents of the theory are also pointing to black matter existing in this form.  I can somehow understand that an inflating/cooling universe is quite capable of forming these hydrinos better than I can understand the Bohr model excluding them.

Offline canufi

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 47
    • http://www.youtube.com/user/canufi
Re: Stanley Meyer replication with low input power
« Reply #1261 on: May 29, 2012, 03:31:26 AM »
Myers clearly explains that his resonance was setup using the capacitance of the cell and tunable inductors to maintain an electric field stimulation of the water.  Dielectric breakdown was avoided. 

Dielectric breakdown is not avoided, it's encouraged at a certain point in time in order to temporarily turn water into a conductor!

 Please watch the lost tapes interview, he says "when I say resonance, I mean the dielectric breakdown of water". Stan himself says he was indeed tuning in to the dielectric properties of water! He says it himself, it's straight from the horses mouth.

The word "resonance" is a buzzword and should have been avoided.

What are the diodes doing in the circuit, by the way? It's not a typical resonant circuit - diodes block flow.. and block so called resonance, depending on what you mean by resonance. Really, we should just stop using the word "resonance" it's bothering me quite a bit. It reminds me of gobblydegook and doublespeak, which the book and movie 1984 warned us about.

Offline canufi

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 47
    • http://www.youtube.com/user/canufi
Re: Stanley Meyer replication with low input power
« Reply #1262 on: May 29, 2012, 03:39:00 AM »
  The dielectric constant of the capacitor will vary.  Myer stated that his engine didnt need distilled water to run on.  He developed feedback loops that sensed the capacitance and varied the inductance so as to maintain the circuit in resonance.

He developed circuits to tune into the dielectric value and strength of the water in the capacitor.  Tap water with more impurities in it, will conduct quicker than distilled water. The reason Stan never got his devices released into the industry and public markets, is because he was too busy debugging and perfecting his system which was very difficult to debug and automate. He had the process down manually by using his  hands to tune into the dielectric properties of water, but you can't be sitting there tuning things with your hands while driving the car.

Stan spent way too much time trying to automate this process with circuits... It would have  helped if he had a Million dollar BMW or Volkswagon car company helping him. One person doing it himself, with his Twin brother here and there, is not enough to get this product into the market.  Plus, scientists do not like Stan meyer, because he used the term Over Unity, which is a big no-no word. Never, ever use the word  over unity. Always explain that your device takes energy from Kinetic molecular movement or from the Sun. DO NOT claim over unity, ever.

Your stuff will NEVER be taught in university or high school if you claim over unity. Again, my Youtube channel has information on this about putting yourself into the teacher's shoes. IF you were a teacher,  you can be ridiculed and fired for saying "over unity". That's a swear word. It's a bad word. Don't use it. I realize this web forum is called "over unity" and I apologize to the owner of this site. I'm arguing from a practical pragmatic perspective, I'm not trying to insult.

Offline canufi

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 47
    • http://www.youtube.com/user/canufi
Re: Stanley Meyer replication with low input power
« Reply #1263 on: May 29, 2012, 03:49:54 AM »
I have switched to electric driving so i'm now loking into effecient way's to generate electricity otherwise i would still be on the Hydrogen wagon.

You should be able to use hydrogen to run a gasoline generator... and if the gasoline generator rusts up, then we need to find All Aluminum ones maybe?  Also check out Stan's "EPG" system which apparently generated electricity.

If someone could just prove Stan's Steam Resonator used less power than an electric stove, then he would prove he was tapping into another energy source such as molecule spin. All someone has to do is prove the steam resonator works... and heats faster than a walmart kettle. It's a simple test, just use a stop watch and heat up one glass of water in a walmart kettle, and compare it to Stan's steam resonator. All these people on youtube are diddling around with smoke and mirrors (bubbles) and none of them do any valid scientific testing to prove the devices produce energy.  Way too many "tinkerers" and not enough people who have a serious understanding of how science works. Science requires measurements. No one is doing any measurements.  Watts is volts and current, not just current alone. Someone do some measurements! Will I be the only one who does them? I don't know.

Offline sparks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2528
Re: Stanley Meyer replication with low input power
« Reply #1264 on: May 29, 2012, 10:15:16 AM »
  I think this whole overunity thing will boil down to the ability of the electric field set up inside a capacitor to do work.  To accelerate mass. The field does the work.  You discharge the capacitor to regain your input energy into the same circuit as the field accelerated mass now your running with gain.  The electric field associated with an electromagnetic wave does the work on the atom to excite the electrons or ionize the atom in some cases.  The magnetic field is the result of virtual particles that create charge.  You move the charge and the virtual particles move along with it.  These virtual particles are everywhere flowing in and out of anything that is charged.  It is only when a spot in the universe changes in charge state do we see magnetic force lines appear.  These virtual particles are responsible for such things as conveying the energy of a transformer primary to a secondary.  They are the force carriers.  When charged particles are fixed  (or the lack of them)  the virtual particles flow in a uniform stream.  The magnetic flow is now smooth and fast running the shortest distance between charge differentiation.    Then you discharge your capacitor before the accelerated mass hits the wall.  The virtual particle stream collides with the new one caused by the capacitor discharge.  It is sent into disarray and your accelerated mass movement along with it.  Slowing down or accelerating charged mass will emit or absorb energy.  Inertia is always conserved.  The photon or electromagnetic wave is inertia in transit.

Offline canufi

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 47
    • http://www.youtube.com/user/canufi
Re: Stanley Meyer replication with low input power
« Reply #1265 on: May 29, 2012, 12:23:16 PM »
  I think this whole overunity thing will boil down to the ability of the electric field set up inside a capacitor to do work. 

Stan claimed in one of his later lectures, I think Denver energy get together, that the Sun was responsible for recharging the water when it went out the tail pipe, and that without the Sun you cannot reuse the water.  It's not over unity if you are stealing energy from the sun.

Electric fields such as lightning, perform work when there is Current.  Lightning requires current to do work, so I doubt you will get Stan's device working without current.  The current is when dielectric breakdown occurs, all of a sudden voltage potential becomes current.  This is much different than regular faraday electrolysis which uses current ALL the time constantly, wasting energy and heating up the water.  I can't believe they still teach that garbage in school - faraday Electrolysis is old bad science, it's quackery.. and stupidity. It's sad our education system is so stupid, I'm glad I dropped out of school and took the hard knocks way.

Offline sparks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2528
Re: Stanley Meyer replication with low input power
« Reply #1266 on: May 29, 2012, 06:40:35 PM »
Stan claimed in one of his later lectures, I think Denver energy get together, that the Sun was responsible for recharging the water when it went out the tail pipe, and that without the Sun you cannot reuse the water.  It's not over unity if you are stealing energy from the sun.

Electric fields such as lightning, perform work when there is Current.  Lightning requires current to do work, so I doubt you will get Stan's device working without current.  The current is when dielectric breakdown occurs, all of a sudden voltage potential becomes current.  This is much different than regular faraday electrolysis which uses current ALL the time constantly, wasting energy and heating up the water.  I can't believe they still teach that garbage in school - faraday Electrolysis is old bad science, it's quackery.. and stupidity. It's sad our education system is so stupid, I'm glad I dropped out of school and took the hard knocks way.

A water molecule is really good at absorbing infrared electromagnetic wave-lengths.   It's not the heat it's the humidity.  The water molecule then expands and floats up to the upper atmosphere where it becomes cooled or denser.  This water molecule wants to come down but finds itself buoyed on the surface of a huge bubble of lower densisty molecules.  As the sun's radiation becomes weaker more and more moleucles begin to compress the low level bubble.  This is vary apparent in flat florida where there is no topological irregularities to pierce the bubble. Bottoms of clouds are often virtually flat.  The water molecules going up appear to also transport a weak net charge per molecule.  The weak net charge of each molecule comprising the cloud is accumulated resulting in a lot of cloud charge.  The Earth below such a cloud gets charged positively.  Somehow the cloud is doing something to the Earth without "current".  A sag in the bubble now focuses the cloud charge.  The potential in this sag region is enough to ionize the air molecules like coronal losses along high voltage transmission lines.  There is no complete circuit to anything.  The plasma growing out of the cloud  becomes a conductor and allows for the net charge of the cloud to extend closer and closer  to the oppositely charged earth.  At somepoint the plasma growth reaches the point where it forms a complete circuit between cloud and Earth.  The capacitance created is then shorted to the limits of the conducting path created by the plasma.  Strike after strike because of disintegration of the plasma column due to resitive losses like heat light and sound.  The total discharge of the capacitance built up in the flatbottom clouds on one strike would be disastrous.  Tetrawatts of power released in nanoseconds is not a good thing to be around.  Not for one second do I believe an electron from the cloud reaches the ground.  Electrical current is not like water in a pipe.  Electrical current is what charged the Earth up before the lightning bolt and created the plasma column that caused dielectric breakdown of the air.  Free electrons are accelerated by the electrical current giving us electrical effects.  This movement of charged particles needs to be detached from the definition of electrical current.  I do believe that the macroscopic electric current from that bolt went microscopic.  The virtual particles that once flowed between Earth and ground now flow between electron and proton.
    Hydrogen in water is bound to the oxygen in water not in your typical covalent bond.  The hydrogen neucleus is buried in a distorted electron cloud.  The oxygen atom is huge compared to the hydrogen protons.  In fact this is why water is a liquid at room temperature and not a gas.  By disruption of the oxygen electron cloud configuration the two hydrogen atoms form a covalent electrical bond and become their own molecule.  Oxygen does it's thing and forms a gas.  The polarized water molecule bond is what makes water a liquid and not a gas.  Water should exist in the gas phase at room temperature according to it's molecular weight.  Yet we find this unatural state everywhere soaking up infrared radiation. Thermal transport goes from the water to the gas bubbling out of the water.  It is then transported to the combustion chamber.  The thermal energy of the unfractured water does not go away.  This would be contradictory to the laws of conservation of energy.  The recombination of hydrogen and oxygen  (ozone is the oxidizer stan used) results in the thermal energy orginally residing  in the water molecules back in the tank to be converted to electron acceleration and deacceleration within the combustion chamber.  This is what combustion is all about.  Rapid oxidation of hydrogen.  Gasoline has to be heated to break the hydrogen bonds.  The liberated hydrogen is then oxidized.  The transfer of electrons from atom to atom is an electron acceleration deacceleration event.  This produces photons.  Photons are then absorbed by nitrogen or other inert gases along with the fuel which expand driving the piston away.  Stan recycled exhaust to cool the whole process down to combustion rates instead of gas detonation which would ruin the engine in seconds.   
   I agree that Stan spread himself thin.  Lets hope his work and sacarfices were not in vain.
 

Offline canufi

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 47
    • http://www.youtube.com/user/canufi
Re: Stanley Meyer replication with low input power
« Reply #1267 on: May 29, 2012, 09:27:58 PM »

 Somehow the cloud is doing something to the Earth without "current". 

Well it's not doing much to the earth, until there is lightning. Lightning is the actual work performed, whereas before the lightning occurred, it's just boring voltage that is potential, not work.  What is the cloud "doing" to the earth during it's potential stage? Not much. The only effect you see, and the only energy you get, is when current occurs. Cause and effect. The cause is potential, the effect is the lightning which is current shorting out.

So once again - in order for Stan's device to have any effect, you have to have some current. Stan even said 0.5 amps.. which is current. And what bothers scientists is that even if you have 0.5 amps, you still have Watts (power consumed) if the voltage is high. Just because you limit the amperage, doesn't mean you aren't consuming any power.  0.5 amps and 200 volts is still 100 watts of electricity.  But I do know for a fact, that Stan was able to produce hydrogen from distilled and from tap water - his devices at his Estate were recently video taped by someone else, and they do work. No government or grand conspiracy has mucked around with his water cell, it still works, and someone demonstrated it online when they viewed his estate.

Offline canufi

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 47
    • http://www.youtube.com/user/canufi
Re: Stanley Meyer replication with low input power
« Reply #1268 on: May 30, 2012, 08:15:33 AM »
Don't look at the voltage potentail only! i too made the same mistake.

The energy is not coming from the source it's drawn in from the atomic bonding force when the 'water plasma' (for lack of a better name) is formed.
I don't exactly understand how but the source alone cannot possibly account for the amount of gas production so i asked my teacher and he told me it was tapping energy from the atom itself.

Well, Stan claims that you must recharge the water with the Sun when it goes out the tail pipe. So ultimately, he's robbing energy from the Sun which beats down on rivers and lakes. He claimed this in his later lectures.  If he's stealing energy from the molecules and then the sun recharges the molecules at a later time, this opens up a whole new area of physics that we currently don't understand. It's possible Stan was wrong and was just playing guessing games. In some of Stan's literature  he claims it is Radiant energy. 

Offline sparks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2528
Re: Stanley Meyer replication with low input power
« Reply #1269 on: May 30, 2012, 05:46:43 PM »
Well, Stan claims that you must recharge the water with the Sun when it goes out the tail pipe. So ultimately, he's robbing energy from the Sun which beats down on rivers and lakes. He claimed this in his later lectures.  If he's stealing energy from the molecules and then the sun recharges the molecules at a later time, this opens up a whole new area of physics that we currently don't understand. It's possible Stan was wrong and was just playing guessing games. In some of Stan's literature  he claims it is Radiant energy. 

    Einstein's mass equivalency statement is cool.  Basically it simply says mass is energy and energy is mass.  It then goes on to predict how much radiant mass you get upon conversion of mass to energy.  This radiant mass is photons.  The water molecule absorbs into it's matter infrared photons which increase the mass of the water molecule.  There are no two ways about it.   A theoretical isolated molecule of water is exposed to infrared electromagnetic waves.  You measure the mass before the exposure and then you measure the mass after the exposure.  The molecule is more massive after.   Now convert this mass gain to energy.  You can also calculate the mass of hydrogen and oxygen before they combine to the mass of the water after they combine.  The results are that the water molecule is more massive than the constituent gasses. (This is an ideal situation where no energy is radiated from the system)  How is this possible.  Where did the extra mass/energy come from.  In order to implode hydrogen and oxygen you need to input energy.  Spark, flame, compression whatever.  Something way back there caused hydrogen and oxygen to bind.  It's input is still there in loads and loads of water.  Combine this with the continuing process of infrared absorption how can you not consider water a fuel scource.  Our planet is unique in that it allows water to exist.  All the lifeforms on Earth we know of  rely on water as a fuel scource.  Man is just fucking stupid and has boxed himself into almost certain extinction by creating overpopulation propped up by fossil and radioactive fuel scources to unsustainable levels.  I don't hold to conspiracy theories about the illuminati and all that,  I adhere to the theory of basically I don't give a shit about anybody else but myself ruling the world.  Maybe a little fondness for people I brought into this world  (basically because they look like me) but otherwise it's all for me and fuck you and all the generations to come well I don't even know those people.

Offline NerzhDishual

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 588
    • FreeNRG.info
Re: Stanley Meyer replication with low input power
« Reply #1270 on: June 01, 2012, 01:45:12 AM »
Salve a tutti,

Are you aware of this patent?
GB 2 324 307 A
Christopher Robert Eccles (UK) - Oct. 1998
Fracture Cell Apparatus

Please, have a look at this document (included file).
IMO, worth to be studied and even tested.

Very Best,
Jean

Offline sparks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2528
Re: Stanley Meyer replication with low input power
« Reply #1271 on: June 01, 2012, 07:05:21 AM »
Salve a tutti,

Are you aware of this patent?
GB 2 324 307 A
Christopher Robert Eccles (UK) - Oct. 1998
Fracture Cell Apparatus

Please, have a look at this document (included file).
IMO, worth to be studied and even tested.
 
.
   This is interesting.  I am sure it would be alot easier to figure out the capacitance of this cell, introduce some inductance, possibly some negative resistance, and couple the whole deal through an avalance diode to a hvdc supply and watch her ring.

Offline canufi

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 47
    • http://www.youtube.com/user/canufi
Re: Stanley Meyer replication with low input power
« Reply #1272 on: June 02, 2012, 01:38:24 PM »
     Einstein's mass equivalency statement is cool.  Basically it simply says mass is energy and energy is mass.  It then goes on to predict how much radiant mass you get upon conversion of mass to energy.  This radiant mass is photons.  The water molecule absorbs into it's matter infrared photons which increase the mass of the water molecule.  There are no two ways about it.


When lakes and rivers are hit by sunlight, the water warms up.  If stan was stealing kinetic energy (heat) from water, then the water should become frozen solid in his water fuel cell, or become frozen mist out the tail pipe of his vehicle.

If the water in rivers and lakes is hit with enough sunlight, some of that water in the lakes will form hydrogen and oxygen at the surface.  The water will decompose in lakes. This isn't an energy source because the water is decomposing in the lake, not in the water fuel cell.

Once again, this is why scientists will not accept Stan's device, because no one actually has the answers about how it works.

One important thing to think about, is why does hydrogen set off an avalanche effect and cause water to form if there is a spark. Why doesn't hydrogen always form water without any spark. There is an initial trigger required to get the hydrogen to explode.  Where does the energy actually come from, when the hydrogen is burned. Hydrogen is stable and has no energy floating around in the air - it's only when it is triggered by a spark does it produce the energy.  Scientists take it for granted that hydrogen and gasoline explode, but they don't fully understand why.

If I hold a spark plug near a paper book or piece of wood, that wood will not explode - even though the wood has enormous energy in it. The avalanche effect does not occur with wood, and wood cannot release it's energy with just a spark.

Offline sparks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2528
Re: Stanley Meyer replication with low input power
« Reply #1273 on: June 02, 2012, 02:45:03 PM »
    The acceleration or deacceleration of electrons emit photons.  The electrons in transit from one molecule to another emit various wavelength photons.  In an engine these photons are then absorbed by the relatively inert gas nitrogen.  The nitrogen gains mass.  It's mass gain is distributed over more space.  Same density distributed over more space is gas expansion.    Nitrous has to be injected at high rpm because just a little bit of thermal input allows for a huge amount of expansion.  At low rpm this expansion is so great that the power train can not get the energy to the wheels fast enough and something has to give.  If stan was just taking the hydrogen and oxygen produced by the cell and using only these two products feeding them into the cylinder than it would be a dismal failure.  Atmospheric gasses are coming into the equation here.  These gasses are not coming into the intake at zero degrees kelvin. They too have mass to convert to energy.

Offline forest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4027
Re: Stanley Meyer replication with low input power
« Reply #1274 on: June 02, 2012, 05:56:45 PM »

When lakes and rivers are hit by sunlight, the water warms up.  If stan was stealing kinetic energy (heat) from water, then the water should become frozen solid in his water fuel cell, or become frozen mist out the tail pipe of his vehicle.

If the water in rivers and lakes is hit with enough sunlight, some of that water in the lakes will form hydrogen and oxygen at the surface.  The water will decompose in lakes. This isn't an energy source because the water is decomposing in the lake, not in the water fuel cell.

Once again, this is why scientists will not accept Stan's device, because no one actually has the answers about how it works.

One important thing to think about, is why does hydrogen set off an avalanche effect and cause water to form if there is a spark. Why doesn't hydrogen always form water without any spark. There is an initial trigger required to get the hydrogen to explode.  Where does the energy actually come from, when the hydrogen is burned. Hydrogen is stable and has no energy floating around in the air - it's only when it is triggered by a spark does it produce the energy.  Scientists take it for granted that hydrogen and gasoline explode, but they don't fully understand why.

If I hold a spark plug near a paper book or piece of wood, that wood will not explode - even though the wood has enormous energy in it. The avalanche effect does not occur with wood, and wood cannot release it's energy with just a spark.

Thank you . You comment let me realize important factor. Yes, wood and paper can explode too ! It's all symmetrical which means hydrogen can also combine into water without burning or with just a little heat. Wood and paper can explode in air with initial spark if they are in form of dust. Coal too can explode that way and many solid state materials too. Hydrogen is a gas so it's already in form required for "chain reaction".