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 Explained  (Read 339374 times)

Offline h20power

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 561
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #690 on: November 02, 2021, 12:04:27 AM »


"All  Molecules  can  be  separated  into  their  component atoms  by  taking  away  the  electrons  from  the  atoms that  make  up  the  molecules."

This is the theory I came up with after studding how Dr. Dingle, Stanley Meyer, and a lot of others ran their cars on the road and even the highways with nothing but water in their tanks for fuel. This theory will one day be in the books of science but for now it only exist in a few forums like this and other places I could put it on the net so that no one comes along and tries to steal the theory from me claiming they are the ones that figure this out. It took me many years studying making use of the scientific method asking and answering questions to figure out how nature goes about breaking the bonds of molecules.


I asked so many questions some of which were original questions meaning no one had ever asked them before. I'd wonder what was all that black stuff on the ice in the arctic and north poles and the answer was carbon. But how did it get there? Turns out a typical thunderstorm will break down any molecule that happens to get swept up in it when the conditions are right for it to do so. Think of thunderstorms as the earth's air purifiers as we already knew they break down the Nitrogen and Oxygen molecules but seem to have missed that Carbon dioxide, Methane, Carbon Monoxide, and Water Molecules are also being broken down in these thunderstorms and many other molecules as I didn't mention them all. But how I first became aware of this was by going over photosynthesis all over again to see if we missed something and sure enough I found out that we did. This lead me to ask an original question, "How do plants break the bonds of the water molecules?" In answering that question is when I saw that a plants very last step in breaking the bonds of the water molecules was to simply take the electrons away from the atoms that made up the water molecules. That's when I saw it for the first time. Then I asked, "How many different ways do we know of to get the electrons away from their atoms?" The many answers to this question lead me to take a closer look at thunderstorms and it also explained a lot of unknowns as before this no one truly knew how those reactors at Fukushima blew up since all the electricity was out and those places do not store any hydrogen in them.


You see by way of electron bombardment the atoms that made up the water molecules were getting their electrons knocked off. This method of water separation creates hydrogen and oxygen gases and electricity as the electron remains in the water bath building up a charge. Once that charge was great enough to overcome the air's electrical resistance it made a spark in the presence of hydrogen and oxygen and the rest is now history. Any way you can come up with to get the electrons away from their atoms will break down molecules into their component atoms. Once I understood this a general theory was easy to derive.


I think we are entering into what Arthur C. Clarke called, "The four stages involved in any revolutionary development."
1. It's nonsense don't waste my time.
2. Oh, it's interesting but not important.
3. I always said it was a good idea.
4. I thought of it first.


For far too long have I been ignored by the people in this forum and told that what I was saying was utter nonsense and also treated as such by many members of this forum. As I cleared one height after the next the bar would always be raised for me. First people told me that I couldn't put high voltage to a water bath as Meyer was lying and even got taken to court and lost the case. But then I did it and was told by many that I cheated somehow and they just couldn't explain how it was I was cheating. Then I actually got the water molecules to break down using high voltage and again was told by many that I was somehow cheating and must have some sort of hidden air pump making all those bubbles coming out of those electrodes. For as you should clearly be able to see now they keep raising the bar on me.
So, it shouldn't be long now before people start telling me 3 and 4 on that list. They are going to find it hard pressed to attempt to steal that theory from me and take my place in the history books as I have prepared for that long ago. And hopefully soon people will start to come around and give me their support so the road to ending the world's reliance on fossil fuels comes to a somewhat swift end. But without the support of the people it's going to take many years to push those that sell energy off of their thrones.


https://www.gofundme.com/f/energy-independence-for-you-and-me


They say we need thinkers, well everyone here I am.


Shalom Everyone,
Edward Mitchell
« Last Edit: November 02, 2021, 08:47:50 AM by h20power »

Offline h20power

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 561
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #691 on: November 11, 2021, 09:06:20 PM »
Here is yet another hydrogen technology that got suppressed: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EoBPayAyCu0 They say that the technology was deemed disruptive and that goes against the US's national security somehow. But one thing has been made clear in that they do actively suppress technologies that would move to help us out of our climate change problems.


I am having a bit of trouble with the SLA printer in that the program file it uses seems to be not supported by many CAD drawing programs. I got all I need right now to make a bobbin set but will have to figure out how to get the dwg file converted to a pwmx file. Once that is done all should be a go for this technology as the science part of this technology is solved now. Then we will see just what type of resistance I'm truly up against. One thing is for sure is if they keep suppressing this technology we will reach the point of no return and then we can kiss our children's future good bye.


This technology is all about mimicking how nature breaks the bonds of the water molecules. The window of opportunity is what makes plants alive for if they didn't break the bonds of the water molecules like this none of us would be alive as plants wouldn't exist. This is why you hear me sometimes say, "We are now tapping into the very wheelwork of life."


Shalom,
Edward Mitchell

Offline alan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 518
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #692 on: November 18, 2021, 02:21:19 PM »
When I studied the tech brief in-depth in the 2000s, I came to the conclusion that the VIC creates lightning condition without the sparks and arcs, to ionize the water molecules that are covalent bonded, until it switches off and breaks down into its components. At the right frequency interaction of impedance effects allows HV while the current is choked by impedance effect of distributed elements at resonance. I think the chokes also function as capacitors, then the circuit resembles the hairpin circuit of Tesla, which creates nodes on a bar by the impedance effect, the bar can be replaced by a water cell and at the right frequency the voltage ripples as a rubber band without current that makes the hairpin dangerous (p=v.i).
The secondary coil just transforms the voltage for the chokes.  I think, but I am not sure, that the chokes put i and v back in phase, so v actually appears on the output. I also suspect a 180 degree phaseshift between v and i somewhere, on the cell perhaps, so v & i in phase through the coils and 180 deg on the cell, but it's speculation.

Offline h20power

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 561
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #693 on: November 23, 2021, 04:47:38 AM »
When I studied the tech brief in-depth in the 2000s, I came to the conclusion that the VIC creates lightning condition without the sparks and arcs, to ionize the water molecules that are covalent bonded, until it switches off and breaks down into its components. At the right frequency interaction of impedance effects allows HV while the current is choked by impedance effect of distributed elements at resonance. I think the chokes also function as capacitors, then the circuit resembles the hairpin circuit of Tesla, which creates nodes on a bar by the impedance effect, the bar can be replaced by a water cell and at the right frequency the voltage ripples as a rubber band without current that makes the hairpin dangerous (p=v.i).
The secondary coil just transforms the voltage for the chokes.  I think, but I am not sure, that the chokes put i and v back in phase, so v actually appears on the output. I also suspect a 180 degree phaseshift between v and i somewhere, on the cell perhaps, so v & i in phase through the coils and 180 deg on the cell, but it's speculation.


Hello Alan,


For the most part I have solved the science behind this technology by making use of the scientific method and the power of observation as good observations is also good science. I shared that information on this thread someplace and went over just how this technology blocks the flow of current from going through the WFC and a whole lot more. Plants break the bonds of the water molecules in the same manor and thus is why you will get a voltage reading if you put a volt meter in a tree as the byproduct of breaking the bonds of the water molecules in this fashion is the creation of electricity.
The theory I came up with is sound and tested and thus the only way to remove it is with a better theory which does happen but as of yet no one has challenged the theory. With that theory I was able to solve many unknows like, "How did those three reactors in Fukushima blow their roofs?", "What took down flight TWA 800 shortly after takeoff?", and a whole lot more.


In this thread I tried in vein to share what I learned about this technology as I learned it but no one listens to me. Thus far I am the only one that I know of that has shown true high voltage being applied to a WFC in a provable manor and I did this way back in 2012 and even have a video floating around that was taken of Gunther and I at the 2013 Global BEM showing high voltage reading in real time. I use to post screen shots of my progress but all that seemed to do was make people mad at me so I stopped posting after reaching 8.8kv as who needs all the drama? I even posted a video when I first got the WFC working correctly showing how the gas evolution looked very different from standard electrolysis. I got accused of faking it and was said by many that I must have put an air pump someplace off camera hooked up to the WFC to generate such large bubbles like that. I think that was the straw that broke the camels back for me and I simply gave up on trying to teach anyone this technology and moved on to just actually trying to get this technology into the marketplace instead. In doing so it looks like I got myself shunned by the OU community.


Thus far I have been really busy making the next generation VIC transformers using this SLA printer I got with the help of some very nice people whom actually support my efforts to bring this technology into the marketplace. I'm working with two different core types to see which one is the more cost effective to move forwards with, but I'm going to need a lot more people like them as this technology has a high cost when starting out small like I am. Right now it just feels like I need to keep hope alive and keep pressing forwards, and believe with all my heart that things will work out in the end.


Take care and thanks for the surprise post.
Edward Mitchell

Offline alan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 518
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #694 on: November 25, 2021, 05:05:14 PM »
Hi Edward,I believe you 100%. I'm going to try to collect your posts from this topic and read them. 
Is your VIC similarly wound as 6-1 and did you also use custom coated ss wire for the 2 chokes? 
btw science is catching up:https://chemistry.anu.edu.au/research/research-stories/triggering-bond-cleavage-electric-fields 
https://wp.icmm.csic.es/wp-content/uploads/sites/32/2015/06/JPCL2010.pdf 
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167732221016731 
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1611.04677 
(haven't looked at it in-depth) 
Take care!

Offline kolbacict

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 838
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #695 on: November 25, 2021, 07:24:04 PM »
https://wp.icmm.csic.es/wp-content/uploads/sites/32/2015/06/JPCL2010.pdf
But carbon dioxide is an insulator, and water is a conductor.
It is not difficult to create any electric field in carbon dioxide ... :)

Offline kolbacict

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 838
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #696 on: November 26, 2021, 12:21:59 PM »
But I came across one interesting publication. :)
Sorry that in Russian, perhaps there is no translation.
Perhaps you have programs that can translate this pdf text automatically.
I don’t have one. And my computer is old. Very old. I don't even have unlimited internet.
In this work, people nevertheless create standing waves in the water at resonant frequencies.
Just as it happens in air waveguides and resonators. And even adjust it with a movable piston.
Only the frequencies are very high ...

Offline lancaIV

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5031
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #697 on: November 26, 2021, 02:06:07 PM »
https://thewire.in/energy/challenges-aplenty-in-indias-pursuit-of-becoming-global-hub-for-green-hydrogen
Coming up on 5,000 acres in Jamnagar, the Dhirubhai Ambani Green Energy Giga Complex will have four giga-factories that will make and integrate critical components of the new energy ecosystem — solar modules, batteries, electrolysers and fuel cells. The group is using acquisitions to gain know-how. In batteries, it picked up Ambri. In solar, it bought Norway’s REC Solar Holdings. In hydrogen, it has tied up with Denmark’s Stiesdal Fuel Technologies.
Stiesdal has designed an electrolyser that can be produced cheaply — about €200 ($231) per kW, in a market where prices typically range between €500-1,000/kW. It runs on alkaline technology, not AEM, PEM or solid oxide. By not needing rare metals — like iridium or platinum for PEM — company founder Henrik Stiesdal told ReCharge, it can be produced at scale. Not needing high temperatures to operate, it can also be bought by a wider set of customers — which gives another boost to scale.


The US DOE price target : 100 US$/KW electrolyzer production costs
when per Kg hydrogen price 70-80% are electricity price dependent, a save 20 US$/MWh e-generation (green,renewable) gives the way free for the 1 US$/Kg hydrogen production costs !


Happy weekend
OCWL





Offline h20power

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 561
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #698 on: November 28, 2021, 05:12:47 AM »
Hi Edward,I believe you 100%. I'm going to try to collect your posts from this topic and read them. 
Is your VIC similarly wound as 6-1 and did you also use custom coated ss wire for the 2 chokes? 
btw science is catching up:https://chemistry.anu.edu.au/research/research-stories/triggering-bond-cleavage-electric-fields 
https://wp.icmm.csic.es/wp-content/uploads/sites/32/2015/06/JPCL2010.pdf 
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167732221016731 
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1611.04677 
(haven't looked at it in-depth) 
Take care!


Hi Allan,


I posted these four photos of exactly how Meyer built the 6-1 VIC transformer: [size=78%]https://overunity.com/7030/stanley-meyer-explained/msg556858/#msg556858[/size] I did so back in April this year. That is all of the information I have on Meyer's 6-1 VIC transformer as I don't have page 5 of 5, but these goes over all turn count data and more. The formula Meyer made use of is here: [size=78%]https://www.google.com/search?q=wheeler+formula&rlz=1C1ONGR_enUS945US945&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=Ph6OiBPABOWmsM%252CjZpH0dO5w1HboM%252C_%253BG2H0NJijcgUE8M%252CjZpH0dO5w1HboM%252C_%253BUk1aKHuP406RpM%252CjZpH0dO5w1HboM%252C_&vet=1&usg=AI4_-kSlNN73VMsbenXXKeGVxuGkiLUXpw&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiOhMWmhKX0AhWOTjABHbs9AlsQ_h16BAgVEAE#imgrc=Ph6OiBPABOWmsM[/size] As you can see I've done my homework. I normally use heavy build wire or some coatings that have a high dielectric value and most of the time with a rating of 200 degrees C. Thanks to Trump things have become a lot more expensive as some of the wire has to come from China.


I don't use the 430FR wire but another that is a bit more resistive, and the way I build things are a bit different than what Meyer did but it's still a high voltage transformer that is resin sealed to get all the air out and prevent the wires from moving around something I had to learn the hard way having a few of my VIC transformers fail on me, but that's the cost of R&D, huh?


All in all I think I've gotten quite good at designing these transformer bobbins now as I put a lot of thought into each design in an attempt to make them perfectly first time around. All of my problem solving skills come in handy when I design things as I am able to truly think things out and fix problems I had in the past and even go over my designs to make sure I don't introduce a new problem.
I do find it interesting that now they are starting to look at new ways to break the bonds of the water molecules and even CO2 molecules after the the bad talk they give me and others about this technology. But with the water they are still trying to get the hydrogen and oxygen separately when this technology produces them together right in the middle of the capacitor plates. But it just lets me know that when this technology does hit the market they will no longer be able to say, "It breaks the laws of thermodynamics," or, "It breaks the laws of physics." Since I have already solved this technology and even came up with a whole new theory for the science books I guess one day I'll be in one of these papers.


Well, I hope you the best with your designs.
Take care,
Edward Mitchell

Offline h20power

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 561
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #699 on: December 03, 2021, 01:22:27 AM »
Here are my some of my first prints with the SLA printer. I still much to learn and hopefully have things dialed in soon as thus far with this learning curve I already damaged the FEP and had to order a new one. Once I have everything dialed in and things are perfect it's time to move on to the next step as my aim is clear in attempting to put this technology on the market.
I put all of my trail and error testing into these designs I build today and I really don't think anyone that I know of designs these bobbins the way I do as these are results of the many things I've learned through failure.
This print was doing okay but I had to leave the machine unattended and it ran out of resin :o . It looks like I have to focus on dialing the printer in with the resin I am using so things will be perfect.


A big thanks to all that have donated to the cause of bring this technology to the marketplace as without your support none of this would be possible.


Shalom,
Edward Mitchell

Offline h20power

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 561
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #700 on: December 11, 2021, 12:20:41 AM »
This looks to be a successful print :D . I will know more tomorrow as I let it rest for a day just washing it and putting it to the side to better control shrinkage which is 3-6% for this resin then I'll check it out fully measuring everything to see if it made it to print or not. Since these resin printers can do things CNC machines can't do I redesigned the bobbins with a lot of added stuff based on what I have learned over the many years I have been working on this technology. Basically I just put all of my problem solving skills together in this newest design. With people like Daniel Donatelli around I make sure not to share my designs as people like him really give this technology a bad name in the eyes of the public. More than once I have caught him stealing my work pawning it off as his own even posting a picture of one of my WFC designs with a link to buy it but he had not made any attempt to contact me so who knows what someone would have gotten if they purchased that through that link of his?! Often I wonder who is paying him to give this technology a bad name in the eyes of public?


Anyway I'm doing what I can to bring this technology to the marketplace the honest way and in general keep hope alive for this technology as most that use to work on it have stopped now as it's a bit harder than they were expecting it to be.


Take care all,
Shalom,
Edward Mitchell
CEO and Owner
True Green Solutions (TGS)

Offline h20power

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 561
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #701 on: December 20, 2021, 12:45:31 AM »
Well, it looks like I am through the learning curve now. The top two are good to go and the other five were part of the learning curve as I learned how to use this Photo Mono X. It's a great machine which allowed me to make some changes to the design I would not have been able to have machined by a CNC mill. Once I have the two bobbin fitted correctly I will wind them up and then see how much it cost for some more transformer resin as I think I ran out.


The important thing to learn is the correct settings of the normal exposer time and the bottom layer exposer time settings. I burned up the FEP in just three prints using the wrong exposer times and had to wait until a new order of FEP film came in the mail. Then I read through the whole manual and found a lot of my mistakes plus watched hours of teaching videos. Now I have the machine dialed into the resin I am using and I'm good to go for making bobbins on my own now. Many thanks to all that have donated to the cause as without your help I wouldn't have been able to afford this wonderful machine that has allowed me to take my designs further. For those that wish to pitch in here's my crowdfund link: [size=78%]https://www.gofundme.com/f/energy-independence-for-you-and-me[/size]


With a lot of support and luck next year will be the year this technology makes it to the marketplace.


Shalom Everyone,
Edward

Offline h20power

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 561
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #702 on: December 22, 2021, 11:42:50 PM »
I got the two bobbins fitted today and took some pics with them on the core. Now all that is left to do is wind them up, note their inductances and resistances, and then vacuum resin seal them so that the transformer can withstand the voltages it is expected to make. Sure it's a lot more to it than that but why bore you all with the details? Anyway this coming year more than likely this technology will be doing something special that will put True Green Solutions (TGS) on the map. I hope all turns out as planned as this world needs this technology if it is to actually do something meaningful towards our shared climate change problems.


A big thanks to all whom believed in me enough to donate to my little crowdfund: [size=78%]https://www.gofundme.com/f/energy-independence-for-you-and-me[/size] as without help from people like you this technology's fight to make it into our world would be a whole lot harder. For those whom are sitting on the fence now is the time to act to help this technology do what it was invented to do. Thanks again for all of your support.


Shalom,
Edward Mitchell
CEO and Owner
True Green Solutions

Offline jimbo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 136
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #703 on: December 25, 2021, 04:48:59 AM »
Hello here's a thought with the Meyers splitter if you were to set it up to take 20 pounds of psi and add a little turpentine to stop any electrostatic build up you could raise water 20 ft into the air as a air water pump .then collect the gas for a fuel cell or a generator .using it twice should prove over unity .there's a third but its pushing the idea .its collecting the hydrogen at the top and filling a large balloon that would carry a fuel cell and once full send it into the atmosphere on a thin copper  line that spins a generator once the fuel runs down it would rewind slowly .there's almost no limit to the strait up with a hydrogen balloon .and the fuel cell inverter would send powder back down the wire .like I said pushing the idea.

Offline h20power

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 561
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #704 on: December 25, 2021, 06:12:30 PM »
Hello here's a thought with the Meyers splitter if you were to set it up to take 20 pounds of psi and add a little turpentine to stop any electrostatic build up you could raise water 20 ft into the air as a air water pump .then collect the gas for a fuel cell or a generator .using it twice should prove over unity .there's a third but its pushing the idea .its collecting the hydrogen at the top and filling a large balloon that would carry a fuel cell and once full send it into the atmosphere on a thin copper  line that spins a generator once the fuel runs down it would rewind slowly .there's almost no limit to the strait up with a hydrogen balloon .and the fuel cell inverter would send powder back down the wire .like I said pushing the idea.


Every since I got at the true science behind this technology I basically tossed out Meyer's Technical Brief as now I get to ask questions right to the actual science behind the technology. I'm sorry people like you can't and/or won't follow my lead for reasons unknown to me, but I have moved on and no longer teach at any level as now's the time to push the technology into the marketplace. However all that teaching of the science can still be found on this thread and it holds true from the day it was posted when I was in the mood for teaching others. I can still remember when I finally got at the science behind this technology and sharing what I had found with everyone only to be laughed out of the room.


You see with me and the work I have shown everyone has never been seen by another. Meyer talked of high voltage being applied to the WFC and I showed it on a oscilloscope way back in 2013. Meyer did show one of his units powering a car and I showed one of my units producing nothing but large bubbles using high voltage with very low amps. You will be well to note that I haven't mentioned any other name from these online forums and that's for good reason as they haven't done anything worth mentioning. These are the facts folks like to ignore when it comes to what I am doing. In time I hope to complete the plan I started on so many years ago and it will be done with a lot of hard work on my part as pushing this technology in these days requires strength, perseverance, and a strong mind to see things through. I have no time or even the will to look at the suggestions of others at this point in time if they are not accepting of the science I have shown already about this technology. Rejection or even just failing to give credit were credit is due when it comes to the science I shared will cause me to just ignore someone on the quick. In this way I think I am a bit like Meyer in that they ignored him and then Meyer turned around and ignored them too putting all of his energy into completing what he had started.


I know on the surface I may seem a but stuck up or even set in my ways but that's not the case at all as I am simply following the actual science behind this technology and when I ask questions I asked them towards the science I uncovered directly. This allows me to cut through anything false and/or things that will simply not work as the science behind this technology paints a completely different picture. This statement goes out to all of you. "As long as you ignore the science I put out about this technology you will always fail at it." You see my contribution to this technology was too get at and share the actual science behind this technology something I know now that Meyer himself didn't fully understand.


To me all of this side talk is counterproductive as just put your questions towards the science I shared to see if it pans out or not based on the science. If you can't comprehend the science I put out then let me be the one to tell you that this technology simply isn't for you and you should move on and find something better to do with your time. For me our atmosphere is in need of saving from the fossil fuel industries, plus all those that sell energy as they are part of the problem also. This technology is the only one that I know of that can fully replace the need to use fossil fuels for power generation and transportation. I have seen others that are interesting but they are always ten years away. This technology only needs the support of the people and it will be available to have in your homes and more. Everyone knows I am actively seeking help with my efforts to put this technology on the marketplace: [size=78%]https://www.gofundme.com/f/energy-independence-for-you-and-me[/size] This technology is like others in that to kick things off requires a lot of money and no it is not something simple enough that you can do in your garage unless you have some garage like I do. The cost of building things correctly is high, the cost of getting all of the measuring equipment is high, and the cost of materials is high. I just paid over $300 dollars for 4kg of wire and before that over $130 for just 2.3kg of wire. The cost of this technology again is on the high side as most of you will know that the differential probe that can withstand the voltages this technology will produce is on the high side which is why most of you moved to not get it but failed to understand that you can't read this technology without that type of a probe. So, in this case failure to get the proper tools for the job at hand locked you out of this technology. See how this all works now? It's not a simple technology that one can just go to the scrape yard and gather all the things you need to make it.


The cost alone locks a lot of people out of attempting to get this technology up and running correctly as most people are poor like me and therefore must save their pennies to be able to afford the things they need which requires a lot of time to go by. People just don't have the patients for such endeavors anymore is what I find and a lot more are just looking for cheap short cuts that simply don't exist. It's one thing to have an idea and quite another to put that idea into this world where it can be held with one's own hands. All these things I show started off as just ideas but I moved to build these ideas and can now hold them with my own two hands.


Shabbat Shalom,
Edward Mitchell