Meyer is referring to the oxygen ozone cycle.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozone-oxygen_cycle

He produced a powerful form of ozone O4 in the air gas processor. The Ozone and water mist were injected at 120 PSI into the injector and a "high voltage high frequency arc" bond cleaved the covalent electron off the excited H2O molecule using the stronger attraction force of the O4 atom which instantly cleaved (common chemistry term) "fractured" Meyer's term or "shattered" Puharich's term the H2O molecule.

Really?   Where does Stan Meyer explain this?

His Colorado lectures, his notes, his air gas processor sitting on the back of the dune buggy.

Can you give me a specific reference?  I've read most of S. Meyer's papers (a while ago) but I don't remember seeing this.

Read them again, it is most of what he talked about.

You show me where exactly in the Meyer Tech Brief (or other document)  you see any mention of O4..     I couldn't find a single instance.

I didn't see any mention in the colorado lectures either. 

I did find this video though:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WlM-TcIxN4

I've never seen it before..  (might be old news)

I have never gleaned anything remotely scientific from Meyers lectures and/or videos, and I'm always amazed by the various things that some people latch on to, and take to heart. I never cease to be amazed by how many people disregard the science and take it all on blind faith.

If you have no scientific background the pseudoscience and invented technical jargon sounds very impressive, but in the real world it's nonsense. Nowhere does Meyer ever even give any balanced chemical equations for any supposed reactions. It's always about electrons being pulled off here there and everywhere!

AC or DC Faradays laws will apply if the water is being caused to ionise and charges are being exchanged.

It really does puzzle me why so many people still think that Meyer actually knew what he was talking about.  He always talks about 'natural water'. What does he mean by that.... what exactly is natural water?  Well in his video clip he goes on to say that just about any old water can be used including salt water, but in his technical brief: RE: VIC Matrix Circuit: Memo WFC 426, page 7 - 8 he states, quote:

'The dielectric property of water (being 78.54 ohms @ 25 degrees C) permits the storage of "Electrical Charge" when a potential voltage difference exists between Electrical Voltage-Plates (E1/E2 as to (E9/E10).'

Now firstly of course the dielectic constant of water is not a measure of ohms, and secondly this constant only applies to very, VERY pure water.

I mean, come on, to call highly conductive salt water a dielectric is preposterous.

Seems to me that people always conveniently overlook the garbage Meyer spoke and wrote in order not to dispell the fantasy.

To me it just emphasises the fact that you can sell anything with a bit of clever marketing, as there will always be plenty of naive and gulible people around to buy it... however useless the product happens to be.

Most people realize that if you take ambient air and run it through the electric arc of the injector, ozone is produced along with other compounds such as methanol as the CO2 in the air bonds with oxygen and other oxides as well such as nitrous oxide..

Well if you can't support anything you state  with references,  it leads me to believe that you're just making things up and adding your own theories (which can cause problems and waste time).


Btw,  which (5-6) figure are you referring to?   I can only find "open ended energy system"  which says nothing about Tetraoxygen.

I think most people get what the purpose of the ozone generator is since Meyer talked about it in detail in his lectures. You can read how Meyer magnetically collected the "magnetic particles" and made them stable using UV light and have seen the small device mounted on the dune buggy next to the air gas processor. There are photos of it on this web site.

That's fine and dandy , but what does all this have to do with tetraoxygen?  Were  you just making things up?

The open ended energy system is simply how he illustrated how the ozone absorbs infra red and goes back to being O2. As an open energy system, thermodynamics does not apply.

Nothing applies until his device is even proven to work..   Which so far is hasn't.

But adding your own home brew (O4)  theories  to Stan Meyer's mystical papers  adds even more confusion to the situation.

I have never gleaned anything remotely scientific from Meyers lectures and/or videos, and I'm always amazed by the various things that some people latch on to, and take to heart. I never cease to be amazed by how many people disregard the science and take it all on blind faith.
If you have no scientific background the pseudoscience and invented technical jargon sounds very impressive, but in the real world it's nonsense. Nowhere does Meyer ever even give any balanced chemical equations for any supposed reactions. It's always about electrons being pulled off here there and everywhere!

Sorry Sparky, "the science" just happened on my bench a few hours ago and there is plenty of science in my background. You are hardly in a position of judging that.

AC or DC Faradays laws will apply if the water is being caused to ionise and charges are being exchanged.

If you spent a little more time at a bench building circuits and experimenting, you would know that it isn't AC. It would best be described as alternating VOLTAGE since both diodes are pointed at the cell and on the capacitor side of the inductors.

If you are so smart perhaps you could explain where the alternating CURRENT takes place in the cell when both diodes (and fast ones at that) are pointed at the cell?

Diodes block current and the amount of electrolysis can not be explained when the diode has a reverse recovery time of 4 ns and both diodes are pointed that the cell.

It really does puzzle me why so many people still think that Meyer actually knew what he was talking about.  He always talks about 'natural water'. What does he mean by that.... what exactly is natural water?

Natural water was defined by NASA as one of their requirements laid out in the advanced energy project. Do you think the people at NASA are idiots? They make and use a lot of oxidizer to boost that space shuttle and other various spacecraft, where do you think they obtain all that oxidizer?  Do you suppose that is the reason Meyer had to sign an affidavit stating he didn't obtain intellectual property from NASA used in his patent in the international test report?

Ron Stiffler also worked on the advanced energy project and invented things that he has been reluctant to show. I am tempted to upload something but won't violate his copyright or trust. Do you think he doesn't know how Meyer's stuff works? Stiffler posted a video on youtube at one point with a couple of electrode in a 5 gal bucket. It was quite impressive.

'The dielectric property of water (being 78.54 ohms @ 25 degrees C) permits the storage of "Electrical Charge" when a potential voltage difference exists between Electrical Voltage-Plates (E1/E2 as to (E9/E10).'

Congratulations on finding a typo in Meyer's notes. If you look real hard, you will find a bunch more. I find typos in your posts. Does that mean you didn't go to college to learn chemistry or is that just your "queens English"?

I make lots of typos too. That does not mean that I have not studied and replicated much of Meyer's work.

BTW - "ionise" is spelled ionize and "Faradays" is spelled Faraday's. It is poor form to make a typo while accusing Meyer of being an idiot for doing the same assuming he was the person that actually wrote what you read - big assumption.

I mean, come on, to call highly conductive salt water a dielectric is preposterous.

Ever heard of a saltwater capacitor? All tesla coilers know how to make these including half the people at this site. I guess you were in chemistry class while the boys were building Tesla coils.

This may come as a surprise to you but using the quantum interpretation of dielectric, all matter is dielectric.

Seems to me that people always conveniently overlook the garbage Meyer spoke and wrote in order not to dispell the fantasy.

To me it just emphasises the fact that you can sell anything with a bit of clever marketing, as there will always be plenty of naive and gulible people around to buy it... however useless the product happens to be.

You have spent years beating your head against a puzzle you claim is fraudulent. Are you an idiot?

So Meyer was an inventor and not a chemist. As a chemist, you seem to have difficulty even replicating Meyer's work much less inventing it. To suggest that Meyer was a fraud is laughable since he had to demonstrate and prove it to the patent office. Perhaps you are suggesting they are idiots?

How about Admiral Griffin? He was well educated in the subject matter and far more than what has been reported. He was also in charge of British military technology. Was he an idiot?

How about Dr. Greer who just bought Meyers stuff for a bunch of money. Is he an idiot?

How about all the chemist and scientist in the international test report that were able to replicate. Are they idiots?

How about the people that offered Meyer hundreds of millions of dollars. Are they idiots?

So Meyer didn't do something you think he should have so you can shove his work into your chemistry mold. Have you read the international test report? Plenty of lab stuff there.

Meyer called it "hydrogen fracturing". Dr. Puharich called it "shattering the water molecule". Do you suppose Meyer, Puharich, Mills, etc. refer to it as such because it isn't electrolysis? Maybe that is why you can't fit it into the mold of your shiny new chemistry degree?

If you want a chemistry explanation, why don't you read and replicate the work of Dr. Puharich. As an MD he had a few years of chemistry and he lays it out in his patent. The difference between Meyer and Puharich is minimal.

My apologies Ramset, wrong call on my part. Be just a mean as you want. I'm gone.