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.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Tesla Paper

Free Energy Book

Get paid

Donations

Please Donate for the Forum.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.(Admin)

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics

  • *Total Members: 83806
  • *Latest: Dex63

  • *Total Posts: 520312
  • *Total Topics: 15506
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 2
  • *Guests: 11
  • *Total: 13

Author Topic: Stanley Meyer Explained  (Read 231752 times)

Offline h20power

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 335
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #300 on: September 07, 2019, 08:30:48 AM »
It's been a while since I have posted on this site as I have been taking a break from all of this and put all of my energy into understand the science behind the technology. As a result I finally got at the science behind the technology and now have a new theory to add to the books of science. This new theory has many different examples of it working in action and hopefully once out will allow many exciting new inventions to be created as I know this theory sits on a whole new era of scientific discovery. Meyer use to say, "This technology is only limited to the mind of the inventor to find a use for it," and trust me that is an understatement.


I am not sure if Meyer knew about this theory but in any event if he did it died with him. With this new theory comes even a safety warning for air travel for it turns out things we thought we already knew everything about we missed quite a few things in our rush to say we did when in fact we really didn't.


For now I have to wait until I can build a few more things so that the technology will work as the science shows it will. This is part of the new setup I am working with showing the water fuel capacitor (WFC) and voltage intensifier circuit (VIC) which will be changed in the future for a more cost effective one as this one cost around $3.5k USD. Not too sure how long it's going to take to get all the rest of the things I need made but once I do all should be a go for this technology.


Take care Everyone and wish me luck.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #300 on: September 07, 2019, 08:30:48 AM »

Offline h20power

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 335
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #301 on: September 16, 2019, 10:25:16 PM »
Taken down due to Armcortex

Offline ARMCORTEX

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 721
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #302 on: September 16, 2019, 10:58:53 PM »
Its really sad the way you dont fully show the b- and b+ voltages in your graph, indicating that either, the water bath acts as ground and electrodes are + or that there is a third electrode, making this a Stephen Meyers like cell.

I have already designed provided you with a 3 phase circuit with appropriate amplification that will act as an alternator and never cross non-linearity of MOSFETS. A 50% efficiency Amplifier that can reach much higher frequencies than an alternator setup, thus allowing you to investigate the Stephen Meyers patent.

And what did you do? You argued with me, and now you hide the souvenirs of our debates, wich I would always win.

I told you people, investigate the Stephen Meyers cell, but noooooo, you still squirm and argue with me.

There should have been a research commitee regarding that patent application, but people such as yourselves interfered in things that surpassed their IQ's.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #302 on: September 16, 2019, 10:58:53 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline h20power

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 335
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #303 on: September 16, 2019, 11:56:20 PM »
Taken down due to Armcortex

Offline ARMCORTEX

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 721
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #304 on: September 17, 2019, 12:09:42 AM »



As for Stephen Meyer I really don't care what he has to say and will never seriously take a look at anything he has done as my goal was to get at the science behind the technology and yes I did finally got at that science despite Meyer's wishes that no one would be able to figure out what he had done. In order to do this I had to step away from Meyer's work and focus on the use of the scientific method to get at the core science behind this technology. Asking and answering questions through experimentation is what the scientific method is all about and I put in the time, a lot of time, to get the job done.


Let me remind you of this fact and quote him IIRC "Nobody really knew what made it work, but I have figured it out and refined the technique, my design is more advanced"

Let me remind you that he is his brother, and a navy engineer, top 5% of his class, participated in the development of the electronics.

If you're not gonna believe that from his brother, then why even borhter believing this whole charade from the get go?

I rest my case.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #304 on: September 17, 2019, 12:09:42 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline ARMCORTEX

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 721
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #305 on: September 17, 2019, 12:30:47 AM »
Taken down due to Armcortex

oK Well I have it quoted.

But seriously H20, did it ever cross your mind that this might be an elaborate scam?

Maybe some sort of gatekeeper mafia operation? Steal from and misdirect present and futur opposition?

Or is it human nature to keep the show going if you think you might make it work sometime in the futur and then to...Steal?

Or are professionnal con artists naturally attracted to these scams with free energy as there is so many ways ot get creative and play in the weak points of the prey, toy with them.

I can think of IEC, Tewari and his son right now... God damn its crazy that they could look at you with a straight face... Even the CEO bigshot totally pushing a hoax? Its weird...

I am not saying Stephen is a fraud, I wish to believe he was for real. But you know, we should never be afraid to admit failure, we are trying to do difficult things.

Not being straightforward and playing games is terribly damaging for overunity movement.

« Last Edit: September 17, 2019, 02:51:58 AM by ARMCORTEX »

Offline ARMCORTEX

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 721
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #306 on: September 17, 2019, 05:24:54 AM »
Why are you so annoyingly gay and pissy?

here it is, lets have a look... There is interresting words here and even a scopeshot, I dont have the img of the circuit I made anymore.Whats insane is that there is talk of mechanical vibration, this could be good in clearing the tubes.

Is this even possible?

https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/21/79/f2/7aebcf545568c6/US20050246059A1.pdf

This patent app was rejected 5 years later. Now this sucks because its a complete dead end, what happened to poor man Stephen, this patent app was like a huge deal so what happened?

So weird... Scam or deal I cant tell anymore.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #306 on: September 17, 2019, 05:24:54 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline h20power

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 335
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #307 on: September 17, 2019, 07:11:29 PM »
This thread is called "Stanley Meyer Explained" not "Stephen Meyer" and I will go one further as this thread goes to show how anyone got a car to run with nothing but water in their tanks for fuel except one guy in the land down under with his Joe Cell. I have an idea how that the Joe Cell works but have never gotten to the point of actual deep experimentation beyond just buying a unit styled like the Joe Cell.


I shared a brand new theory that can't be found in the science books of today as it's brand new and you, Armcortex 😒[/font][/size][size=78%], act as if it was a personal assault or attack against you. And something to note this theory comes complete with multiple examples of it in action to prove it is in fact valid. I found something the entire scientific community missed in it's never ending quest to understand the world around us and beyond. A brand new theory that is every bit as important as any other theory found in the books of science today, but since it is new a whole new era of scientific discovery lays behind it. I don't know why the posting of that video pulled your chain and truthfully I don't care why but what is clear to me is you need to seek help as something is clearly wrong with you. [/size]


My guess would be that you have been working at this for so long that it has driven you mad. Thus anyone that dares to write something that even remotely challenges the way you say things work is a direct threat to your long time spent at trying to solve this technology but coming up empty handed each and every time.


Unlike you I ask and answer questions like a good scientist is supposed to do and not just make up things that can't be backed up with clear scientific examples. My assumption was that, "Mainstream science must have missed or overlooked something concerning this technology?" and now that I know how it actually works I was correct in that assumption. I had to step away from everyone's work and focus solely on the science. Meyer was trying to prevent anyone from stealing his technology and did a really good job I might add. He worked between the lines of legality to hide his technology in plain sight. Then others came along and got to actually look at his technology and made a few mistakes that has carried on in everyone's work after what he posted went through all of the many forums on the internet. This mistake prevents the technology from working and Meyer left out the primary equation that drives this technology on purpose as a way to hide the technology from would be thieves with deeper pockets than he had that would have shut him out of the technology he was trying to bring forth.


However with your response I felt that Overunity isn't ready for the new theory so I pulled down my post while I still had the control and/or power to do so. If and when I decide to post something showing this technology actually working is totally up to me as I don't owe anyone one here anything. Each of you has the power to make use of the scientific method just as I did so I owe none of you anything for what I did each of you could also have chosen to do if you wanted too. So, each of you have the free will to make use of the scientific method just as I did and who knows it might not take you several years as it took me to get at the true science behind this technology. Good luck everyone 🥳[/font][/size].[/font][/size]

Offline ARMCORTEX

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 721
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #308 on: September 17, 2019, 11:44:01 PM »
ROFL... Wow great, thunder is the answer it was so simple all along....yep...thunder....you got it all figured out

Cya around in your water car.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #308 on: September 17, 2019, 11:44:01 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline ARMCORTEX

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 721
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #309 on: September 18, 2019, 07:29:36 PM »
Its funny H20, how you think you are better than Stephen Meyers.

Stephen is an engineer, thoroughbred, and you are not. You took away your post because it made you look bad.

You might be a "CEO", but your company never made a dollar nor sold a product, you have been CEO for 7 years LOL...

This is a joke, to mix the word "CEO" when we are still @ experimentation stage is the chicken before the egg. I hope this is not your pickup line ROFL

This is the problem with OU, and especially HHO, its filled with low grade people "CEO"s.

Offline h20power

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 335
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #310 on: September 29, 2019, 08:00:35 PM »
Mitchell's Theorem - "All Molecules can be separated into their component atoms by taking away the electrons from the atoms that make up the molecules." [/font][/size]

[/font][/size]
Basically what is being done to break the bonds of the water molecules with this technology is mimicking the way a thunderstorm works but plants also break the bonds of the water molecules like this. The last step in the way a plant breaks the bonds of the water molecules is to take the electrons away from the atoms that make up the water molecules. What I found interesting in my studies to learn how this technology actually works is no one ever asked this question, "How does plant break the bonds of the water molecules?" Once I saw that all it really did was to reach in and take the electrons away from the atoms of the water molecules I then looked into other ways in which we know how to get the electrons away from their atoms. I found so many examples of that new theorem I came up with that it's a wonder no one ever saw it before, but I guess if you are not looking for it asking the right questions then sure no one would ever see it.[/font][/size]

[/font][/size]
So, you all might be wondering what other examples of that theory in action did I find, correct? Once I knew what to look for the rest was easy. The explosions that took place at those three nuclear power plants in Fukushima separated the bonds of the water molecules by way of radiation bombardment. Again I find it rather interesting that no one ever ask, "Where did the hydrogen come from?" The radiation was so high that it physically knocked the electrons away from the atoms that make up the water molecules and in doing so create hydrogen, oxygen, and electricity. As the process takes place an electrical charge is being built up which will create a spark when it has enough energy to do so which ignited the hydrogen and blew radiation all over the globe.


In thunderstorms, which we all know clouds are capacitors, a charge is built up and when it has enough energy to ionize the atoms of the molecules they release their electrons and the molecules they once formed are no more as it happens to Nitrogen & Oxygen molecules as well as the water molecules. All of them will product the lone gas atom of the molecules plus electricity and once the cloud is charged enough it produces a electrical discharge we all know as lightening. The thunder we and feel and hear is a hydrogen explosion taking place in the clouds that has the power to shake the very ground we walk on.
Some planes have found out the hard way that when the conditions are right a thunderstorm produces vase quantities of hydrogen like flight TWA 800 that intercepted the hydrogen gas on it's way to the top of the cloud and it's engines ignited the hydrogen gas blowing the plane to kingdom come.


Now that you all know what to look for you can easily find other examples of this theory I created in action. Plus now you know how Meyer went about breaking the bonds of the water molecules at rates high enough to run his dun buggy with very little electrical power input and you also know why the water doesn't heat up like it does with electrolysis. With electrolysis current is being used to get the electrons away from the atoms that make up the water molecules and with current use comes heat. Meyer mimicked a thunderstorm in which high voltage potential differences are used to break the bonds of the water molecules as yes voltage does perform work and now you know a bit more about how it all works.


My use of the scientific method lead me to see exactly how this technology works and in doing so also found out that we humans still have a lot to learn about the way things work in the world we live in and call home.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #310 on: September 29, 2019, 08:00:35 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline onepower

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 387
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #311 on: September 30, 2019, 11:09:10 PM »
h2opower

It's good to see someone is trying to put all the pieces together as it relates to the natural world.

As you say, plants take in CO2 and H2O and use the Sun's energy to break up the H2O into H to form hydrocarbons and expel the O2 everyday all around us. If they want proof all they have to do is look outside there window at all that green stuff growing all over the place. Nature does it all the time and I suspect once mankind has matured they will as well.

A man named Viktor Schauberger built a device which used this natural process. The device did the opposite to what we do burning CH to form CO2, H2O and an expanding heat reaction. Viktor's device pulled in air containing CO2 and then added charged water vapor (thundercloud) to liberate the H within the H2O. The H then combined with the C in the CO2 to reform back into a CH and O2... just like every plant does. Note that deforming or burning CH with O2 forms CO2, H2O and produces heat which expands a volume. However reforming H2O and CO2 back into CH and O2 produces a contracting volume, equal yet opposite. Thus the deforming CH-O2>H2O-CO2 reaction and the reforming H2O-CO2>CH-O2 reaction can perform the same amount work, equal yet opposite.

At the end of the day any old fool can burn/deform/destroy something to liberate energy but to reform/recreate something like nature does and liberate energy... that is genius. It's not that difficult to understand and the equations are as follows.
Destruction + Unsustainability = Stupid + Suicide
Reconstruction + Sustainability = Life





Offline ramset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7087
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #312 on: October 01, 2019, 12:50:22 AM »
Mr.Mitchel,Thank you for posting your info [perhaps again ?]I believe the earlier Rudeness will not be so prevalent...[ for the time being.

There was another group from Florida USA which was talking about making a trip across  country in a large motor home that ran on a system which was compared to a Lightning strike
or similar ?  They were supposedly going to stop in Washington DC and show congressmen ?
 been a while since this was shared ...I believe they had a video too ?will look for that info [or someone here familiar can post it in the mean time ?
I know this has been a ruff trip for you ...thanks fo sharing your hard work and thoughts
respectfully Chet K

Offline h20power

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 335
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #313 on: October 01, 2019, 05:28:38 AM »
Thanks Onepower and Ramset for the kind words and you are very welcome as the way I see it it's time for this technology to come out. The other guy I really don't blame him as he has worked on this technology for a long time and came up empty handed which is very frustrating to say the least, but his continued rudeness was unacceptable and uncalled for.


It took me a long time to get at the actually science behind Meyer's work but in the end I did finally get around all of Meyer's many misleading statements misdirection. With photosynthesis the only thing one needs to ask and answer is, "How does a plant break the bonds of the water molecules?" As simple as that questions seems it has never been asked before, as far as I can tell, thus never answered. The answer to that question is the plant takes the electrons away from the atoms that make up the water molecules which action breaks the bonds of those water molecules. What it does with the hydrogen and oxygen doesn't concern me as that was not part of the question. Once I saw that all it did to break the bonds of the water molecules was to take electrons away from the atoms constituting it another question came up. "How many ways do we know of on how to take the electrons away from their atoms?" When I had found a few I then went looking for examples of water being broken down that way and found many different examples of that to be true.


Then I got curious if that worked on other molecules? and searched for proof and found it. Oxygen and nitrogen molecules are nonpolar covalent molecules. They cannot dissociate into positive and negative ions, separating charge this way, because their bonding electrons are snugly and equally shared between them. Instead, the electric field must be intense enough to rip tightly bound electrons off the atoms in these molecules, ionizing them that way. That act breaks the molecules down into it's component atoms as the intense electric field causes the atoms to eject their electrons, no electrons no covalent bonds.

In my study of thunderstorms I found out what is in the books is incomplete for once the cloud's electrical charge is strong enough to overcome the atoms ionization energies and causes those atoms to eject their electrons the molecules they formed gets broken down. The produce the atoms that made up the molecules and leave behind those ejected electrons to further increase the charge. Once this charge is high enough it will overcome the air's resistance and produce a lightening strike. In the diagram I posted different nitrogen atoms and molecules to give you an idea of what is happening to them. Only the five valence (outer shell) electrons in each nitrogen atom are shown. In reality, nitrogen atoms contain 7 electrons, with two of them confined to an inner energy shell. Lower right Is a partially ionized atom. There are degrees of ionization. A fully ionized atom (bottom left) contains only the nucleus. In this case, every electron moved into an excited energy shell and then left the atom altogether (it takes even more energy to remove the two inner electrons not shown in the other atoms).

We'll explore this ionization process further in a moment.

It takes almost twice the energy (945 kJ/mol) to break the powerful triple bond of a nitrogen molecule than it does to break the double bond of an oxygen molecule (497 kJ/mol). A kilojoule (kJ) is a measure of energy. One mole (mol) of atoms contains 6.02 x 1023 atoms. Once split, oxygen atoms are a bit more easily (partially) ionized than nitrogen atoms - 1314 kJ/mol compared to 1402 kJ/mol, respectively, to remove an outer electron (to remove all the electrons from a nitrogen atom, including those in the inner higher energy shells, would require far more energy, about 4578 kJ/mol - nitrogen in this state is also a plasma, but it has much higher energy).

The electric field  building beneath a thundercloud eventually has enough energy to break apart, excite and ionize nitrogen and oxygen molecules. Nitrogen atoms by themselves are highly reactive. They will quickly recombine into nitrogen (N2) gas or into nitrous oxide (NO).  Meanwhile, excited nitrogen molecules emit blue light. Oxygen molecules likewise are excited. They may also release photons of light, but more often they react with unexcited oxygen molecules to create ozone, before they have a chance to. This ozone, which only lasts about an hour before it decays back into molecular oxygen, is often linked with the fresh clean smell after a thunderstorm. The air under a thunderstorm is very humid. Ionized hydrogen atoms split apart from water vapor contribute red to the glow, so that ionized humid air glows violet. Now being a scientist I already know you don't typically find hydrogen all by it's self in nature but yet there it is.

This is how thunderstorms work as when the conditions are right they produce hydrogen in vase quantities as well a other ionized gas atoms. Meyer simply mimicked this but arranged the capacitor(s) to a vertical position so that the ionized gases could escape without being ignited by the electric field. Every molecule broken down adds it’s electron to the cloud increasing the electric field intensity. This explains why the reaction kept going after Meyer shut the device down as those electrons are in the water bath and must travel through the VIC circuit which has resistance which will convert that energy into heat. Basically the capacitor is being discharged and that takes time based on how highly charged it is through the diode until the voltage/current controlled switch shuts off as that is the role the diode plays in the VIC circuit.

In time this technology will turn the tide on climate change but thanks to those that sell energy, whom paid some scientist to tell everyone that this technology violates the laws of physics, it's tough to get support for this technology. As unlike those tobacco scientist where everyone could clearly see they were lying this time those paid-to-say scientist got believed by the general public as their general understanding of science isn't all that great.

For us, now we can clearly see voltage does in fact do work and all we have to do is place a high voltage potential difference electrical field on the plates of the water capacitors we make. It's not as easy as I make it sound but at least we now know what must be done and why.


I know of another guy that figured out some other things on using hydrogen to power ICE cars named Roger Billings and have made contact with him. Here is a video where he talks about how he beat the electric car on being what best for our environment. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Jn59ivRpQQ

Offline onepower

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 387
Re: Stanley Meyer Explained
« Reply #314 on: October 01, 2019, 06:50:48 PM »
h2opower
Quote
For us, now we can clearly see voltage does in fact do work and all we have to do is place a high voltage potential difference electrical field on the plates of the water capacitors we make. It's not as easy as I make it sound but at least we now know what must be done and why.

I agree and found it strange how so many of the critics keep saying "voltage has no power" or "voltage can do no work".

In fact, Voltage is the Difference in Potential and the "Force" in the (Work = Force x Distance) equation. The Potential Difference is the "Force" and the Current is the flow over a "Distance". At which point it should become clear that when any person claims voltage has no power or can do no work they obviously do not understand what Voltage or Work are nor how they relate to one another.

The Voltage or Difference in Potential is the Force which causes something to move. The effect is that something is forced to move over a distance which we call work and when a given amount of work occurs over a period of time we call it Energy. However normally we just say everything is Energy because everything is already in perpetual motion everywhere. Everything is in perpetual motion which is Energy because we can find no examples of anything in the universe which is not in motion on some scale.

It can get kind of confusing because many claim to be looking for energy when in fact they are made of energy and literally swimming in a sea of it. Maybe they cannot find it because they are too deeply immersed in it?. In my opinion the premise of Free Energy is that we cannot create or destroy energy, only transform it. So what were trying to do is transform one kind of motion already present into another kind of motion which better suits our needs. 

So really the Meyer device is just a motion converter which breaks up some molecules, reforms them into other molecules, liberates some of the internal motion present in the molecules during the reformation process and transforms the motion into a more suitable form we can use.

Regards



 

OneLink