Water as FUEL


REPLICAS of MEYER – Qiman13 posts 2

## QIMAN13 Posts on Meyer Replication Part 2: (page created at November 2007 Update)

Freedomfuel, Posted: Tue Oct 05, 2004 12:53 pm Post subject:
Qiman has introduced so many interesting ideas that it is hard to know where to start. Sorry if this post is going to be long, but here goes. Qiman is absolutely right when he says that Stanley Meyer’s water fuel system is Tesla technology. I am not sure if Stanley was consciously influenced by Tesla or if he independently stumbled upon the same approach.

Unfortunately, some of the valuable, if unconventional ideas of Stanley that Qiman has noted have been overlooked because much of what he said was bullshit. Here are some of the characteristics that I have observed with energy devices of this type, some of which may apply to the Meyer water fuel system:
1) Low level nuclear reactions without the expected reaction products
2) The production of charge clusters.
3) A glow discharge in the air around the device or in the electrolyte
4) The device runs cool
5) The device may have antigravity properties
6) The application or induction of high voltage pulsed DC within the device
7) The device appears to run backwards. For instance it may become cooler as more power is drawn from it. It may exhibit negative resistance, i.e. as the current increases the voltage across it may decrease. Electrons may travel in the opposite direction of the voltage gradient. The device may exhibit negative entropy. For instance matter usually attains greater entropy, or disorder, as heat is applied to it, i.e. solid => liquid => gas. Browns gas on the other hand passes from gas to liquid as heat is applied to it. Charge clusters are an example of a self organising system in disequilibrium with it’s environment (an open system, in other words).

Here is a clarification on what Qiman has written about longitudinal and transverse EM radiation. There is nothing in Western textbooks to indicate that longitudinal EM waves exist so unless we have access to some sophisticated and unconventional measuring equipment we have to accept Tom Bearden’s account of what it is. According to Tom EM radiation has both a vector component which is the transverse radiation and a scalar component which is longitudinal radiation. The transverse EM wave consists of a magnetic and electric component in phase with each other and perpendicular to each other and the direction of travel. According to Tom if two such waves, travelling in opposite directions, 180 degrees out of phase, and with the B and E fields in the same plane, are superimposed on each the vector components would cancel out leaving the scalar component. Sceptics might say that as there would be no electric or magnetic fields associated with this longitudinal EM wave there would be no way of knowing that it exists. Actually it’s existence is could be demonstrated dramatically by such phenomenon as the ‘Hutchinson effect’, not to mention certain weird WMDs possessed by the Russians. In fact the Russians are probably way ahead of us in EM theory and longitudinal EM waves are mentioned in their open literature. For instance check out the experiments and patents associated with Avramenko’s ideas for single wire electric transmission and the ‘Free Electron Pump’ at JL Naudin’s site.
http://jnaudin.fre.fr/html/afep012.htm
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/fep01.htm

The single wire transmission concept is interesting because it may give some insight into how Stanley’s water fuel system really works. The schematic shows a high voltage, pulsed DC generator supplying a single wire feeding a Xenon strobe light. Impossible according to conventional physics but if you accept that the wire transmits a longitudinal EM field to the load it makes sense. As Qiman has made clear there is more to electricity than moving charges. Bill Beatty at www.amasci.com has devoted a section to misconceptions about electricity including the almost universally held belief by non-scientists that it is electrons carrying little packets of energy which they give up to the load. It may be useful to ask a dumb question like ‘why do electrons have to move in order for electricity to do work?’. Conventional wisdom says that static electricity cannot do work yet in the 1970s Tesla fan Edwin Gray powered an EV largely with static electricity much to consternation of physicists at the time. Perhaps we should accept Beatties view that electrons have a role analogous to air particles in the transmission of sound. It seems to me that if the Avramenko circuit really does do what he says it does then there would not be a flow of current through the transmission wire. Instead the wire would be more like a waveguide around which longitudinal EM field travels. The fact that power to the load was undiminished by making the wire very much thinner tends to support this theory.

Qiman says that the Meyer water cell should be regarded as and open system in disequilibrium with the environment much like a windmill for instance. The turning of the windmills sails could be seen as the way in which it constantly attempts to regain equilibrium with it’s environment. What is the equivalent of the turning of sails in the Meyer water fuel cell? The clue may be provided by the Avramenko schematic. One important component is an antenna for capturing free electrons, which are used to trigger the Xenon strobe. There is something like this going on with certain Joe Cells, which have been observed to exhibit a pink or blue glow discharge in the air around them. This is not the same as a corona discharge, which would require millions of volts for an object of this size. Such a phenomenon was utilised by Patrick Flanagan in his patent for an Electron Field Generator.
http://homepage.ntlworld.co/ufophysics/efg.htm

This is a device which uses the phenomenon of ‘dielectric absorption’ to induce an electron cascade in the air around the device. If such a mechanism can exist when water is the dielectric this could explain the glow discharge seen surrounding the water cells. In this case of the water cell could also be regarded as antenna capturing free electrons to trigger some kind of discharge within it.

Qiman is absolutely right when he states that the Meyer cell produced what we now know as Browns Gas. It is clear from reading the resume of Stanley’s speech at the SEET 94 event that he knew that it was water going into his engine. You can obtain a video of his speech at www.nutech2000.com. It is also obvious from the Dingel videos that the white mist rising out of his reactor is water. The Joe Cell guys are also adamant that they are not separating Hydrogen and Oxygen from water in their cells. Let’s face it -the water car is not a Hydrogen car. Qiman’s account of how Browns Gas is formed is interesting but I find it hard to accept that merely rearranging the Hydrogen atoms in the water molecule could raise it’s potential energy to such an extent. Also Browns Gas implosion cannot be a normal chemical reaction. It could not even be an abnormal chemical reaction. What we have here is something very potent and without parallel in science. The hypothesis I am working on is that Browns Gas has charge clusters suspended within it and it is these that give it it’s unusual properties. Charge clusters are billions or even trillions of densely packed electrons held together by one of the strongest forces in the universe, if not the strongest force. Here are some papers on the subject:
http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/ChiceaDelectroncl.pdf
http://svn.net/krscfs/Charge%20Clusters%20In%Action.pdf
http://svn.net/krscfs/nev%clusters%202.pdf

The electric spark between metal electrodes is nothing more than the ionized trail left by charge clusters in the air. Ask yourself also why Tesla coils require a spark gap. We use Browns Gas rather than Hydrogen because it stores more energy per unit volume, because removing the membrane between the electrodes to separate the gases induces BG production as does pulsing the DC supply. The advantages are an improvement in performance, much lower fuel consumption, clean emissions and best of all it’s FREE!

qiman13, Posted: Wed Oct 06, 2004 3:32 pm Post subject: wow!
Freedomfuel, you understand the longitudinal vs. transverse better than me. I’m happy you see the Brown’s gas connection. I’m definitely not sure if the arrangement of the h2o is changing or not or if it is just sucking up a lot of the voltage potential to “swell” up the water molecule. Something very interesting that I think I mentioned before is that George Wiseman at www.eagle-research.com build a BG cell that is plexiglass or something. When looking at the plates, directly in the middle of the plates are a sheet of bubbles that are so dense it looks like another steel plate. That sheet of bubbles is the BG. The effect is definitely not happening at the plates, but directly half way in between the plates.

It is definitely not a chemical reaction when Brown’s gas burns. It is an electrical flame and not a fire flame…so it is an electrical reaction. Aluminum is a fairly good conductor and when putting the flame on it, it can conduct the voltage potential away from the flame pretty good so it doesn’t melt at the “flame” spot and water is produced on the spot. A rock is a poor conductor of “electricity” so the voltage potential cannot be dissipated away from the flame and this is why the rock melts into a puddle.

Instead of electrons building in the water, I’m looking in the other directions. I think the water molecule, regardless of its arrangement, is absorbing pure voltage potential (the Aether) without extra electrons. When it is swelled up and ignited, the voltage potential swelled up in the h2o is transferred to the material is it “cutting,” the molecule shrinks back down to size and turns into visible water.

It seems from Meyer and others that there are various levels of energy that the water can get to. But basically, the stage 1 – pretty powerful, #2 – extremely powerful, #3 – just plain ridiculous (Hypergas) I don’t think I can really buy into the ortho and para hydrogen deal. Has that been proven or is that concept just an idea? I see a lot of people commenting on it but they seem to be just regurgitating what they read.

One comment I would like to make about the “free electrons” is that Gray’s tube didn’t work with free electrons. Normal hv with current (electrons) went into the tube. When the switch was closed at the top of the low potential rod, the hv potential that were built up in the tip of the hv potential rod would jump across, slam right into the carbon resistor. The electrons would stay in the circuit. 90 degrees perpendicular to the current direction, the Aether component of the current (without electrons) would radiate 90 degrees outward and this is what the grids intercepted. That Aetheric component would be carried out to the inductive load (pulsed coils on the motor) and back to ground. It was really like popping a balloon. The air would go out and that would be the Aetherial component and the rubber left behind would be the electrons. It is literally breaking the “electric” and “magnetic” component of electricity apart. “SPLITTING THE POSITIVE” this is an interesting subject that only one person I know of has been showing it for years.

If we take a balloon that is highly pressurized (high voltage) and push our hand on it against a wall, the balloon flattens. The pressure is directed 90 degrees perpendicular to the direction that we are pushing the balloon. Eventually, the balloon pops and the air (aether – voltage potential) is released from the current (balloon rubber) traveling outwards to the grid. The balloon rubber is still there in the circuit (rods is the hand and the wall).

In Gray’s circuit, instead of the circuit creating straight radiant potential, it made regular HV in the HV cap and the tube split the Aether from the electrons. This was the exact method. I think the “Holy Grail” of water fuel production would be a Gray tube discharging into a water cell. It would make Meyer’s technology look like a feeble attempt I believe. Has anyone got the Meyer videos online yet?

Freedomfuel, Posted: Thu Oct 07, 2004 11:05 am Post subject: Re: reference to Stan:
qiman13 wrote: We know for sure 100% positive that the inductors do reduce the amount of current flow regardless of it changing the frequency and/or voltage. Even if after the inductor the frequency and voltage is unchanged, it does reduce electron flow since it restricts current but still lets the voltage potential come through. Current still flows through but less that what is available at the front end.

Inductor definitely further restricts current that can come through the negative electrode to ground so it makes sense to have an inductor (variable for fine tuning) on that end as well. Tesla used things such as carbon resistors to do the exact same thing, etc… So, inductor before the cell and after the cell is definitely helpful.

Another thing to restrict electron flow is the frequency itself. For example, if a coil is pulsed at a certain frequency there is a certain impedance. If the frequency gets high enough, the impedance is so great that no electron flow can happen but the voltage potential is still available at the output. I don’t know if I’ve seen too many references to the connection between high frequency though an inductor the limiting of electron flow but permitting voltage potential to get across in reference to Stans work. I only printed the first 2 “chapters” so far.

Instead of focusing on 100% inhibiting electron flow, maybe we should focus on limiting it as much as possible and if we happen to get no amps detectable, then yahoo! Anyway, have you or anyone else monitored amps going to the cell while playing with frequency?

Increasing the frequency should reduce the amps as well and not just the fact of having an inductor. Inductor + higher frequency = even more electrons restricted.

There has been much speculation about the function of the inductors in the Meyer patent and Qiman has suggested that they were intended to restrict current through the cell. From what I know of electrical theory it does not seem possible to me that you can alter the current through an inductor independantly of the voltage across it. I susspect that these inductors were added to the schematic to foil would be imitators. There seems to be a consesus that Ed Gray made deliberate mistakes in his patents to prevent imitations.

The voltage across an inductor is directly proportional to the rate of change of current with respect to time, ie:
v = Ldi
dt
The current through an inductor is is directly proportional to the time intergral of the voltage across it, ie
i = 1 INT [v dt, lim=t,infinity]
L
Therefore voltage across the inductor is proportional to inductance and current is inversely proportional to inductance. Increasing the inductance to restrict current will only increase the voltage drop across the inductance. It could be that with high voltage pulsed DC weird things happen and the normal rules of electromagnetism do not apply. The reference to the Ed Gray circuits being verified by others is interesting. Does anyone know anything about this?

qiman13, Posted: Thu Oct 07, 2004 5:25 pm Post subject:
Freedomfuel, On one of the very first “tests” just to see what the inductor did, this is what I got. For an inductor, I just used magnet wire wrapped around a plastic spool. I wasn’t concerned with how much inductance, just the general properties when applied to the circuit.

I used a variac and put it through a bridge for pulsed DC 120hz. I put that through a blocking diode and to the cell.

Without the spool of wire inductor – at about 7volts, it was drawing about 5 amps. With the spool of wire inductor – I could turn it up to about 50 volts, while is was drawing 5 amps. Of course, this is more power than we want but it demonstrates a concept. It shows me that with an inductor, higher voltage for the same amperage is possible. Of course with that amperage, the inductor got hot as hell but I could still get higher voltage.

If Meyer did use inductors, I don’t think heat was a problem. If he was using 35 volts at 350ma or something like that, that would heat it up. Besides, I really believe the key is to send radiant spikes into the inductor to begin with and the inductor won’t get hot. Actually, it should stay room temp or even get cooler than room temp if it truly radiant spikes.

My initial thought on the inductor is that it would increase the frequency. Pulse in is one pulse to the cell and the inductor gets charged. Pulse off, the inductor collapses into the cell since it can’t go backwards. So 2 pulses for the price of one. When I measured it on a scope, the inductor didn’t increase frequency. I also thought on the collapse, the collapsed voltage would be higher than the applied pulse, but it showed on the scope that didn’t happen either.

What did happen was that the voltage and frequency coming from the inductor to the cell was unchanged. However, it was totally inverted. It was all negative voltage of the same + voltage, just inverted. I asked someone credible about the inductors specifically on Meyer’s circuit. All he said was that he wasn’t sure that Meyer ever used on on the negative side of the wfc.

I think he most likely used them but I think he really may have been producing radiant spikes and those radiant spikes were going into the inductors just to “clean them up a bit” or as an extra precaution to elimitate electron flow.

I believe that if real good radiant spikes are put into the cell to begin with, the inductors are definitely not needed.

In Gray’s patent, it seems that the deliberate missing info was the circle in the bottom right of the basic tube schematic. What was missing in the circle was the overspark “points” to shoot the voltage back to ground.

Seems Peter Lindemann figured that out I believe. Gary McGrattan (spelling??) duplicated the Gray tube discharge. I received all the tech reports from him. I believe he did it, but he doesn’t understand what he did. He is trying to explain it in conventional terms and is WAY off. It is very obvious. Just goes to show that people can duplicate results without knowing really what is going on.

I’ve duplicated various devices and didn’t really figure out what was really going on for several years afterwards.

qiman13, Posted: Sun Oct 10, 2004 2:59 pm Post subject: oops
If he was using 35 volts at 350ma or something like that, that would heat it up. I meant to say that that input would not heat it up.

Freedomfuel, Posted: Sun Oct 24, 2004 10:49 am Post subject:
I have been interested in anomalous physics and ‘impossible’ energy devices for only a few weeks and so I have not had as much time to form my ideas as Qiman. My first impression of this research was ‘this is crazy stuff!’. Nethertheless I was sufficiently intrigued by what I read at the John Bedini and Tom Bearden websites to continue my research into the subject. I now believe that we are at the eve of a revolution that will overturn much of the certitudes of physics and completely change the way we live. The catalyst will be the accumulation of anomalies that can longer be ignored; thus leading to a crisis in physics that can only be resolved by fundamentally revising theory.

It is often claimed that Tesla is the father of this revolution having discovered scalar longitudinal electrodynamic waves, or ‘scalar waves’ for short, which formed the basis of his ideas about ‘cold electricity’. If it is true that Meyer also utilised such scalar waves in his WFC it would provide a more plausible explanation for how the device worked since we have established that an electric field will not have much effect on the covalent O-H bond at strengths below which arcing will occur. All that we could expect from such an electric field is for the Hydrogen bonds in water to be broken making the water less viscous. There is research, probably classified, to show that scalar waves exert a mechanical stress in a medium through which they pass much as sound waves do, since sound waves are also longitudinal waves. This suggests that the mechanism for gas formation within the Meyer WFC could be analogous to air bubble formation in water due to ultrasound, with charge clusters forming within the bubbles due to charge separation. Note that such a hypothesis is a long way from conventional ideas about electrolysis based on ion transport between the plates. Here is a brief account of

Tesla’s work on ‘cold electricity’: Adrian Akau. Longitudinal Waves and ‘Cold Electricity’ http://www.faraday.ru/14-15.pdf

This and the Linderman book on the Secrets Of Cold Electricity are interesting as historical accounts of Tesla’s work but what is required to convince the sceptics is some experimental proof of the existence of longitudinal electodynamic forces and waves. A good place start is the instructions for repeating the Avramenko experiment to demonstrate single wire transmission using longitudinal waves given at JL Naudin’s site: http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/afep012.htm

This uses a 555 square wave generator, a power transistor and a car ignition coil to feed power t Xenon bulb via a single wire. By modifying the circuit to make the lengths of the pulses variable this would be a good starting point for investigating ‘cold electricity’. I have not studied the theory behind this device but I assume that as this is an open loop there are no moving charges on the line and there is a potential wave and a longitudinal electric field moving either just beneath the surface of the wire or in the space around it. It is interesting to note that the capacitor in the circuit has it’s potential raised without it’s plates being charged. This is exactly what Qiman says should happen with the Meyer water capacitor when fed with high voltage, pulsed DC. Also note that the diodes indicate that this potential wave changes polarity. It could be interesting to see what happens if we feed a Meyer water capacitor with this single wire transmission device. It might not be free energy because during the leading edge of the pulse work has to be done to oppose the induced emf in the primary of the ignition coil and during the trailing edge of the pulse stored energy is transferred to the secondary of the coil. What happens to this energy after that is a bit of a mystery.

In this paper by Lars Johannson he examines research into longitudinal electrodynamic forces beginning with Ampere: Lars Johansson. Longitudinal Electrodynamic Forces http://www.df.lth.se/~snorkelf/LongitudinalMSc.pdf

He describes Nasilowski’s experiment with current pulses in the killoamp range used to explode wires that were similar to Tesla’s wire exploding experiments using capacitor banks. Another example of such longitudinal forces is provided by water explosions caused by underwater arcs that cannot be explained by expanding gases.

The existence of such longitudinal forces in conductors was implicit in Ampere’s original formulation of his law on the forces between current carrying conductors. According to this formula there would be a longitudinal repulsive force between co-linear current elements. According to this paper by Kouropoulos such co-linear current elements would exist as ‘charged loops of magnetic flux’ near the surface of a conductor, which organise as bound vortices of electrons rather like charge clusters but with lower density and electrostatic energy.

C.P. Kouropoulos. Classically Bound Electrons – EV’s, Exotic Chemistry, and ‘Cold Electricity’ http://www.mypage.bluewin.ch/Bizarre/EVs.htm

Since these electronic vortices would be formed during the trailing edge of the pulse then continuously repeated pulses with the pulse width progressively reduced would inhibit normal conduction and leave most of the mobile electrons in the conductor as static, shrinking electronic vortices. Under this condition all that would travel along the wire, or around it would be a scalar potential wave with a longitudinal electric field in the direction of propagation. This interpretation supports Qiman’s conception of ‘pure voltage potential with no current’.

It is significant that Tesla continued his cold electricity experiments using an electric arc that was deflected with a rotating permanent magnet in order to adjust the pulse width by deflecting the arc. This device was used to supply the primary of the giant Tesla coil in his Magnifying Transmitter, a monstrous scalar wave transmitter with which he intended to achieve world domination. According Ken Shoulders a spark is nothing but the ionised trail left by charge clusters or EVs as he calls them as they erupt from tiny cracks in a cold cathode subject to high voltage negative pulse. According to Ken these charge clusters should behave as tiny scalar wave emitters.

‘Ken Shoulders also has suggested that the EV is a spherical monopole oscillator. As he describes it in the conclusion of his book EV: A Tale of Discovery, “This [monopole oscillator] is the perfect generator for vector and scalar potential waves without contamination from either E or B fields. These waves can be thought of as longitudinal waves in the vacuum. They are largely undetectable by standard E and B detecting means but are readily accessible to the monopole world.’

R.A. Nelson. Ken Shoulders’ Electrum Validum http://www.rexresearch.com/ev/ev.htm

The real breakthrough has come from an experiment by Monstein and Wesley to demonstrate the existence of scalar waves using a spherical antenna.

Monstein and Wesley. Observations Of Scalar Longitudinal Electrodynamic Waves http://www.astro.phys.ethz.ch/papers/monstein/7210.pdf

This has caused quite a stir because hitherto such scalar waves had been thought impossible by everyone outside the black project community. A normal antenna at the simplest level is a dipole in which mobile charges move together and cross over at the middle of the dipole before moving apart to a maximum before moving together again. A spherical antenna is the equivalent of a single point charge that decreases in magnitude to zero then changes polarity before increasing in magnitude to a maximum before starting to decrease again. As there are no moving charges on the antenna there is no transverse B and E fields. Instead there is a scalar potential wave with a longitudinal electric field in the direction of propagation. Another interesting observation is that electrical energy can pass across a capacitor without the plates being alternatively charged and discharged. It is only a small step from this to conclude that a capacitor can be raised in potential without an increase in charge on the plates, as Qiman maintains.

Kouropoulos has analysed in some detail the overunity battery charging system by William Alek known as the ‘motionless shock charger’ (see above).
Motionless Shock Battery Charger http://www.nuenergy.org/pdf/charger.pdf

Kouropoulos relates this device to other free energy devices like Bearden’s MEG and the Floyd Sweet device. Their common feature, in his opinion is that they utilise a coils linked to ferrite magnets to produce a back emf greater than the applied emf from continuous pulses. Once again normal conduction is inhibited by pulses inducing the production of static, shrinking electric vortices surrounding the wire, but just below the surface.

These electronic vortices shrink towards the centre of the wire, according to him, and drive the back emf by converting some of their mass into energy. The shrunken, disordered Torii need to absorb thermal energy in order to be restored as usable free electrons. Thus the coil cools making this an endothermic process. Studying the circuit diagram above we can speculate about how the Meyer schematics should be redrawn and the inductor re-designed. I suggest that the inductor should be in parallel with the water capacitor and the blocking diode between the inductor and the water capacitor. You could experiment with linking the coil(s) to a magnet as in the battery charger.

Finally I have re-read Tom Bearden’s thoughts on the subject and I realize that what I wrote about scalar waves being formed by superimposing normal EM waves 180 degrees out of phase is an over-simplification. John Hutchinson has demonstrated that super-imposed EM waves will produce a scalar potential wave but it is rather more involved than I thought.

I am still not convinced by Qiman’s account of aether energy, but there is a growing consensus that a pure vacuum devoid of mass and energy does not exist. Although there may be a background energy that keeps the Hydrogen atom in it’s ground state no one is suggesting that this is the source of all EM energy. In my opinion, based on the Kouropoulos paper in the link above, charge clusters are the key that will unlock everything; free energy; antigravitation; cold fusion; and EM healing. Not only are the physics of these entities mindboggling but so is their technological potential. Study this paper assiduously. Don’t worry if you don’t know what anti-Stokes Lasing is because I don’t know what it is either!

Dave, Posted: Sun Oct 24, 2004 5:13 pm Post subject: Aether
Hi Freedomfuel. I believe the Meyer WFC uses aether vortex spin for its anomolous behavior,here is some true info.http://www.energyscience.org.uk/index.html Best Regards Dave

Freedomfuel, Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2004 1:03 pm Post subject:
I have heard the ‘aether vortex spin’ theory with regard to the Meyer cell but I am unconvinced. It seems to me that the ‘aether’ is too readily invoked when people encounter some anomolous excess energy that they cannot account for when it could have some more mundane source like sunlight. The Kouropoulos paper C.P. Kouropoulos. Classically Bound Electrons – EV’s, Exotic Chemistry, and ‘Cold Electricity’ http://www.mypage.bluewin.ch/Bizarre/EVs.htm

refers to various states of matter in which electrons are bound together by short range forces to overcome their coulomb repulsion which I believe has some relevance for understanding Browns Gas. In the case of bound electrons as charge clusters he puts forward the theory that they are electronic vortices that implode and draw in heat from surrouding electrons in the conduction band. This is an endothermic process in which heat is converted into electricity, although there may be more to it than that. If I am right about this then what we have here is really a form of solar energy

I have seen the Aspden site you referred to but I found the esoteric subject matter of little relevance to building real overunity devices.

Dave, Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2004 4:49 pm Post subject: Patents
Quote: I have seen the Aspden site you referred to but I found the esoteric subject matter of little relevance to building real overunity devices.

Hi I sugest you check out some of Harold`s patents ,that is pretty revelent to overunity.I have to say I don`t go much on scientific maths I `am just a engineer and practical,.I spent to much time in High energy physics and looking for exsotic particles to be faffed with it .as for the Aether there has been so good practical worke to show it is real. Best Regards Dave

Attos, Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2004 2:06 am Post subject:
Quote: If I am right about this then what we have here is really a form of solar energy. Freedomfuel, can you elaborate a bit more on this, please?

Freedomfuel, Posted: Wed Nov 24, 2004 12:13 pm Post subject:
Attos wrote: Quote: If I am right about this then what we have here is really a form of solar energy. Freedomfuel, can you elaborate a bit more on this, please?

One of the most noticeable things about these so-called free energy devices is that they run cool. Sometimes they are so cool that their temperature goes below freezing and ice forms on them. From this it would appear that they are converting ambient heat into electricity. This is not such a strange idea when you consider that heat pumps do more work than their energy input because they are drawing energy from ambient heat. Dennis Lee even claims to have made free electricity from ambient heat using a heat pump.

I think that it was Geoff Egel at Energy21 http://fortunecity.com/greenfield/bp/16/orgone.html

who said that people had observed ice on the radiators of water cars. What this means is that the radiator of the water car acts as a tremendous heat sink because there is a large temperature gradient between the radiator and the surrounding air. The second law of thermodynamics, about which I know very little, states that for heat to do work there must be movement of heat from a high temperature source to a low temperature sink, so clearly these free energy devices do actually conform to the second law of thermodynamics. Nothing revolutionary there then.

There are several questions we should conside from this; Is the potential rate of heat flow through the radiator enough to supply the vehicle with 50kW of power? I am not an engineer so I do not know how to do the calculations for this, but it seems highly unlikely that ambient heat would be sufficient to power the vehicle alone. That is why I am sceptical about claims of having powered a vehicle with just the product of water electrolysis. There could be some other more obscure source of energy from the environment like ‘zero point energy’ but there is no way to test this hypothesis with our present measureing devices.

Engineer and author Moray B. King has spent 25 years studying these devices and his conclusion is that most of them depend on a phenomenon called ‘charge clusters. This is a very obscure subject about which very little has been written in mainstream physics literature and I am not sure that the physics establishment even recognise the existance of charge clusters. When Ken Shoulders tried to tell the great physisist Feynman about them his initial reaction was to the effect ‘get out of here!’, but later he changed his mind. Here are some links that might help you understand what is going on. The first link provides a hypothesis of how charge clusters may draw energy from ambient heat:
http://www.mypage.bluewin.ch/Bizarre/EVs.htm
http://padrak.com/ine/FB97_1.html
http://www.svn.net/krscfs/nev%clusters%202.pdf
http://svn.net/krscfs/Charge%20Clusters%20In%Action.pdf
http://blake.montclair.edu/~kowallskil/cf/48clusters.html
http://www.rexresearch.com/ev/ev.htm

Remember that all the answers to these questions were discovered years ago by the black project scientists working for the US military and we are a long way from catching up with them.

mel, Posted: Tue Dec 07, 2004 6:49 pm Post subject: electrolizer
ok i am a machineist i can make the chambers but could never make the electronics who can make me a board that works off 12v dc and how much will it cost. btw if your going to run a car off hydrogen the timeing must be moved to 8 deg past tdc for gasoline it is 5 deg before and just running the gas from the electrolizer to the engine will be a disaster ive seen it already when hydrogen and oxgen burn on thier own they implode air must be injected into the moter so that it can be super heated and xepand to make the motor work the way it should. my ultamate goal is to suplement gasoline with h2o to avoid embrittalment of the engine and rusting out the exaust 5-10% gas should be fine i like the idea of getting 200mph

LaserLine, Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2004 2:30 am Post subject: Re: electrolizer
mel wrote: ok i am a machineist i can make the chambers but could never make the electronics who can make me a board that works off 12v dc and how much will it cost.

I don’t want to volunteer for him, but you may want to ask chemelec. He is very knowledgable with circuitry and has made some for some group members in the recent past.

al, Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2004 7:46 pm Post subject: Re. Electrolyzer
Chemelec, can you make a board that works off 12v dc and how much will it cost. Thanks Al.

chemelec, Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2004 8:41 pm Post subject:
Quote: Chemelec, can you make a board that works off 12v dc and how much will it cost. Thanks Al.

Al, The simple pulse generator on my site will run at 12 volts. But Remember, I make No Claims as to How much hydrogen can be Generated. There are Too many other factors involved.
http://www3.telus.net/chemelec/Projects/Projects.htm

I also Prefer Not to assemble any of these projects, as my site is “Supposed to be for Hobbiest interested in doing projects themselves”. But “Sometimes I make Exceptions”. I Just Want Everyone knows where I stand on this.
Anyone can Email me direct at chemelec@hotmail.com But the word “Electronic” MUST appear in the “Subject Line”.

qiman13, Posted: Sat Dec 11, 2004 5:50 pm Post subject: The Solution – What you’ve been waiting for
To the mechanic – build the cell and just connect 3 fully charged car batteries to the cell, it will make gas. After you make the plumbing all right and safe (back flash bubbler) , etc… step #1 – just make a flame burn steadily.

To the rest of you. I have already posted the answer as to how the Meyer cell works you don’t listen. Meyer was sending unidirectional longitudinal IMPULSES to the water cell. PERIOD!!! He is sending radiant impulses to the water. Do you get it? I’ve already succeeded in duplicating it…you’re all wasting time.

Here is a shortcut. http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Bedini_SG

Check out that circuit in the schematics…it is what Meyer had but more simplified in a way that even most of you can do it. Look at the concept of what is happening. Bedini is sending the SAME IDENTICAL EXACT types of impulses to batteries as what Meyer was sending to the water cell. If you all don’t get it, then give up because you’re not paying attention. Goto that website and learn about this circuit.

I can’t believe nobody has duplicated it as I have. It took me 3 months to make more progress than many people have spent 10+ years on!!! Forget all the resonant lc circuit crap because that is 100% for sure NOT what the circuit is.

Just make one single concentric tube setup and just hook a couple car batteries to it. Just get the mechanics of down and make the plumbing right…you can get enough info to be able to have the gas output go to some nozzle to burn a steady flame safely!

Just do that first! If you can’t even do that, then forget about it. One and only once you have that, then look into various ways of improving the efficienty of the input NOT BEFORE! Otherwise, you’ll never get anything done. You’ll all just be wasting time figuring out what Meyer’s was doing and you’ll never get started on anything. Also, if you never got the book, Secrets of Cold War Technology by Gerry Vassilatos, then you’re not serious. Just get that book an read chapter one about 10 times. You’ll then understand EXACTLY what Meyer was doing!

If you all do that and post results, I’ll send you to the next step but you don’t deserve then answer before that. I spent too much time and effort to give it to anyone that didn’t work for it.

al, Posted: Tue Dec 14, 2004 9:40 am Post subject: H-O mix requirement
qiman13, I am getting 24mi/gal at constant speed of 65mi/hr from my 1990, 4.9l, V8 Eldorado. Converting to liters (3.78 l/gal) my car uses 2.708 gal/hr or 10.24 l/hr. Gasoline weighs 1.55291 lb/l, converting 10.24 gives 15.6 lb/hr fuel consumption. At 14.7A/F (Air to Fuel) ratio my engine uses 233.7 lb/hr of Air (14.7*15.6).

Note that the engine has PFI (Port Fuel Injection) therefore little air is displaced by atomized gasoline. 233.7 lb/hr represents the “volume” of air that my engine is capable of sucking-in at constant speed of 65 mi/hr.

NACA 1383 Figure 5 shows that most efficient burning is for 30% hydrogen in AIR by volume. Air, specific weight is 0.076474 lb/ft3 at sea level. Converting 233.7lb/hr of AIR to volume gives 3056 ft3/hr (233.7/0.07647) or 86539 l/hr (3056*28.31685 l/ft3). 30% of 86539 are 25962 l/hr or 432 l/min of Hydrogen gas that my engine may suck-in. Gasoline has 9000Whr/l of energy.

My car consumes 9000* 10.24l/hr = 92160 W in an hour (123.6hp in an hour). At Standard Temperature and Pressure Hydrogen Gas has only 2.7Whr/l of energy. H-gas-AIR Mixture Thus at 0.3 Hydrogen/Air ratio, 25962 l/hr times 2.7 gives 70097W of energy (less than 92160W consumed).

Therefore, my car will not run on Hydrogen and Air mixture at 65mph, unless it is introduced directly into cylinders at higher pressure than atmospheric (my car has PFI only). Are there on-board electrolizers that can produce 432 l/min of H gas?

H-gas-O-gas Mixture
NACA 1383 Figure 5 also shows that at 1atm H-gas and AIR flame temperature is 2400° K or 2127°C.

Normal hydrogen-oxygen welding yields temperatures of around 3315°C.
Hydrogen-oxygen mix (Brown’s gas) melts tungsten at 5660°C.

Assume that the hotter the flame, the greater the amount of work thus, higher pressures in cylinders. Using Brown’s gas may increase energy by a factor of 2.7 (5660/2127). Thus Brown’s mixtures should have over 7.27Whr/l of energy.

Paper p36r0.pdf (see below link) shows Ta values for various H-O combinations. http://reaflow.iwr.uni-heidelberg.de/~crs96/Program/Contrib/Paper/p36ro.pdf

H2+O2=2OH Ta= 28789degK or 28516°C. Assume that 2OH mixture has 36.2Whr/l (2.7*28516/2127) At constant speed of 65mph my car consumes 92160 W in an hour.

Therefore, it needs 2546 l/hr of H2-O2 mixture (92160/36.2) or 42.4 l/min and NO AIR. One (1) liter of water yields about 1840-liters of gas-mixture. This equals to 1.38 liters of water per hour (2546/1840).

1. Anything wrong with my calculations and assumptions?
2. What is energy requirement to dissociate 1.38 liters of water using efficient electrolizer?
3. How many plates or SS tubes the electrolizer should have to produce 42.4 l/min of H2-O2 mixture to run my car at 65 mph (some posts claim to produce 20 l/min)?
4. Who experimented with “nitrogen hydroxide” (nitrogen hydrogen and oxygen combined) see
http://www.cyberspaceorbit.com/hfsystems.html? Thanks, Al.

Freedomfuel, Posted: Tue Dec 14, 2004 12:20 pm Post subject: Re: The Solution – What you’ve been waiting for
qiman13 wrote: To the mechanic – build the cell and just connect 3 fully charged car batteries to the cell, it will make gas. After you make the plumbing all right and safe (back flash bubbler) , etc… step #1 – just make a flame burn steadily.

To the rest of you. I have already posted the answer as to how the Meyer cell works you don’t listen. Meyer was sending unidirectional longitudinal IMPULSES to the water cell. PERIOD!!! He is sending radiant impulses to the water. Do you get it? I’ve already succeeded in duplicating it…you’re all wasting time..

OK, but where is the experiment? I have seen so many statements of this kind before and I am beginning to get a bit cynical about it all. If you were a scientist you would publish a carefully documented description of an experiment with precise instructions on how it was done so that other scientists could confirm your results by reproducing the experiment. The fact that you do not means that I cannot take you seriously. Prove to us that you are not another Frank Roberts.

qiman13, Posted: Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:13 pm Post subject: proof
I already posted schematics, video clips, pictures, etc…EVERYTHING
Some a**hole from here went in and deleted everything. Besides, for someone needing proof before they build the actual cell w/bubbler is someone who will never get anything done anyway. They wait around and comtemplate to consider to evaluate to finally make a decision to get started about 10 years later. I’m not wasting my time with those people. If someone has the guts to make a decision to do something with this, make the cell, bubbler, etc… then get to the next step.

Regardless of how the gas is produced, you might as well have the setup ready to receive the power no matter how it is produced don’t you think?

For anyone that wants gas to play with…the do the batteries, if that is too difficult for you then get a variac, put the output through a bridge to turn it into pulsed dc. Put that output to the cell. 35 volts at 4 amps will give you enough gas to impress yourself. LOL Not very efficient but enough for you to make a cell to handle that volume. AFTER you get the cell built, then work with the power supply. I can tell you that no matter what power supply you have, Meyer’s type or other, if your cell isn’t sealed right and the magnetic fields from the wire are intefering with the gas produced, etc… you will NOT get results. Make the cell correctly FIRST.

Simon, Posted: Tue Dec 14, 2004 7:57 pm Post subject: Re: proof
qiman13 wrote: I already posted schematics, video clips, pictures, etc…EVERYTHING. Some a**hole from here went in and deleted everything.
get Eric to stick them up in the files section! im sure he wont delete it….

al, Posted: Wed Dec 15, 2004 10:11 am Post subject:
[Regardless of how the gas is produced, you might as well have the setup ready to receive the power no matter how it is produced don’t you think? quote]

giman13, my car has only 80amp generator, has 4.5l V8 not 1l, and there is no room in the engine compartment. If your H-O mix has 4 times the energy of H-Air mix than I need 42.2 l/min to run my car at 65mph. Anything less you have inadvertently created Joe’s Cell.[if your cell isn’t sealed right and the magnetic fields from the wire are intefering with the gas produced, etc… you will NOT get results./quote]

Or you are producing “nitrogen hydroxide” see http://www.cyberspaceorbit.com/hfsystems.html Thanks, Al.

mike140366, Posted: Wed Dec 15, 2004 11:52 am Post subject: Hello, just read these 6 pages
Really good discussion. I wish I could understand it all. I am more than happy to duplicate the experiment. A question? Has anyone read kanarev and his version of low voltage electrolysis? His conclusion:

“Thus, the voltmeter shows a capacitor charge voltage value, and the oscillograph shows a value of its recharge, which characterizes the energy consumed by the cell from the line. It appears from this that in order to calculate energy consumed by the low current electrolyzer cell from the line it is necessary to use voltage, which is registered not by the voltmeter, but by the oscillograph. As a result, energy consumption for hydrogen production from water in case of low current electrolysis are reduced not 12fold, but almost 2000fold.

The correspondence of the water electrolysis process during low current electrolysis to its electrolysis process taking place during photosynthesis is confirmed by intensive production of gas bubbles within several hours after the electrolyzer is disconnected from the mains.

CONCLUSION The method of conversion of electric energy into thermal energy with energy efficiency index of more than 100 folds has been found.

Thus, the convincing theoretical and experimental proofs of existence of a method, which reduces energy consumption for hydrogen production from water 1000 folds and more, have been got. Such reduction of energy consumption for hydrogen production from water affords ground for an assumption that low-current water electrolysis is similar to its electrolysis, which takes place during photosynthesis.

The way of a transfer to economical and environmental friendly power engineering is opened. But it will not be an easy one. There will be a lot of work concerning optimization of the parameters of the global energy generators.” I hope the above helps. Mike Taylor. Life is….4 kids and no sleep!

bluespark, Posted: Thu Dec 16, 2004 2:17 am Post subject:
Hi, Quiman. I am begining to replicate your experiments. Thanks for your help.

I readed the chapter one of the bok that you suggested and agree with You about the central idea behind Meyer’s work and radiant energy. I constructed the cell with two concentric inox tubes and with my variac and a bridge I will test it. What electrolyte do you recommend ? Gino

qiman13, Posted: Thu Dec 16, 2004 10:07 am Post subject: electrolyte
Glad to hear it. No electrolyte. I only use tap water. You could use potassium or sodium hydroxide if you are using current and want more conductivity. You’ll get a LOT of gas. Not super efficient, but you get effective results for sure. You can get great results with using regular current. If you can at least get all that down, then move towards the radiant production.

Anyway, as far as calculating how much gas everyone is going to make etc…, in my opinion it isn’t a good way to go. With the pulsed unidirectional impulses to the cell, it doesn’t follow Faraday’s law anyway and to my understanding, there isn’t a simple formula you can easily whip out to tell you what you’re going to wind up with. You need to understand math models that relate to open systems or at least partially open systems. Not necessary for results.

So without the math involved, just get some good gas production and put it in a vacuum line to the intake and check the results. Then go from there. Forget all the percentages of how much is supposed to give such and such results. When looking at it like that, like Tesla said, that math isn’t going to create anything based in reality. You have to just do it basically and later on, use the math to see what you got but not to find out what you need to make. That isn’t true science. True science is doing it hands on and then figuring out what happens afterwards.

Basic results can be had by taking the alternator output without going thru a regulator and then thru a bridge and to the cell. That is the most crude way to do it that still gives results. It might be harsh on the metal in the tubes or plates but with that amperage, it would do that.

For the radiant, you definitely want square wave pulses going to the cell. An alternator isn’t going to give you any clean and crisp square waves. You could take the output of an alternator (before) the voltage regulator and simply make sure it is thru a bridge so it is DC and charge up a capacitor bank. From the capacitor bank, simply square wave pulse that directly to the cell. Since the bridge has diodes on the lead end anyway, you don’t need an extra “blocking diode.” That diode’s ONLY purpose is to prevent a reversal in the polarity….it automatically shows everyone that it is NOT an LC circuit. That isn’t even debatable.

Anyway, alternator to caps to square wave pulser to cell. The most simple radiant machine you can build is Bedini’s in my opinion. So, alternator to cap bank, cap bank to Bedini’s circuit and that circuit straight to the cell instead of to a dead battery. The schematics for Bedini’s circuit (that he released in the last couple months) is shown to be a single coil, you can have multiple coils and multiple transistor setups, that improves the radiant transfer to the output diodes. Have them all come back together and hit the water cell with that. You will have a simplified version of Meyer’s method and it should blow away xogen’s results.
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Bedini_SG
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Bedini_SG:Schematic

Join this group and study the messages, you’ll learn quick about radiant energy
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Bedini_SG/ This of course would be what Meyer was producing.

bluespark, Posted: Fri Dec 17, 2004 5:48 pm Post subject:
Hi, Quiman, I’m grateful for your nice explanation. In order to simplify the composition of parts, is it plausible to replace the capacitor bank and alternator by one or more batteries ? If positive , what voltage do You recommend for the sqare waves pulses and the relation on/off time ? 1:1 ?

Is the bicycle wheel of the Bedini device self-propelled or drived by a motor ? Can I use neodimiun magnets to assemble the Bedini device ? Thanks in advance for your encourage. Gino

qiman13, Posted: Fri Dec 17, 2004 5:59 pm Post subject:
Yes, you can replace everything and just power the cell by a battery bank. I would use 3 car batteries that are each charged over 14 volts. That is a truly charged 12 volt battery. A 12 volt battery at 12 volts is literally a dead battery.

That would be a 36volt battery bank but would really be a little over 40 volts if the batteries are charged up. For the duty cycle, I would start with 50% (half on half off). check those results and then adjust higher and lower to compare results with trial and error. I’ve seen lots of comments about what the best duty cycle is but it really seems to depend on the entire system as a whole…different for everyone in other words. (I would tend to go over 50%)

That bicyle wheel is turned by an electromagnet pulsing and the magnets around the wheel are repelled by the magnets to get going. Once the circuit is in resonance, the scalar component (super south pole) is being attracted to the electromagnet.

Neo magnets are good if you want torque on the wheel but for good efficiency, I would use regular ceramic magnets. I wouldn’t use a bicycle wheel, I would use an aluminum rotor maybe 5″ in diameter. Once learning that circuit, it can be easily modified to be solid state (no rotor needed), it will just produce high frequency radiant impulses that you can send to the water cell.

bluespark, Posted: Sat Dec 18, 2004 4:27 am Post subject:
Quiman, The ceramic magnets are ring, cylinder or disc magnets ? The rod inside the coil is ferrite or silica plated steel ? If I use a scope with two channels and connect the first to the input coil and the second to the input water cell , is the radiant impulses detected by it when in resonance ? Via what channel ? When in resonance , any kind of change in the waveform is noticeable ? Or resonance means only the max output gas ? Sorry … many questions … Thanks for all Gino

chemelec, Posted: Sat Dec 18, 2004 9:26 am Post subject:
qiman13, Quote: Posts: 38 Joined: 07 Sep 2004 Posted: Fri Dec 17, 2004 5:59 pm
———————————–
Yes, you can replace everything and just power the cell by a battery bank. I would use 3 car batteries that are each charged over 14 volts. That is a truly charged 12 volt battery. A 12 volt battery at 12 volts is literally a dead battery.

Almost Immediately after removing a car battery from a charger, the Voltage will Fall to around 12.6 to 13 Volts. Actually a 12 Volt Battery is Considered Dead at 10.5 volts Under a Typical Load.

A 12 volt battery should be charged to about 14.5 volts for Cycled Use or to about 13.5 volts for Continuous Standby Use. Continuous Charging at 14,5 volts will damage the battery.

qiman13, Posted: Sat Dec 18, 2004 6:51 pm Post subject: magnets
Just use plain square or rectangle ceramic magnets. Rectangle about 1.5″ long, .75″ wide and .25″ thick rectangle magnets from radio shack for example work fine. Put them around the rotor. You can find plenty of examples of motor setups in that website I referred you to.

At minimum, the motor is a UNITY motor, meaning it is 100% efficient. The rotor is @ about 25% meaning the motor is 125% efficient at MINIMUM since all the work in the shaft is FREE. For the coil, use bundled up iron welding rod cut to the length you desire. On a scope, you will see high voltage spikes that look just like up and down lines but there is virtually no time component to any of them spikes. 12volts in and the spikes will be about 300 to 500 volts and this is WITHOUT any stepup transformer action. There isn’t any device that will directly measure the radiant energy itself. Devices only measure wasted energy.

qiman13, Posted: Sat Dec 18, 2004 7:00 pm Post subject:
chemelec wrote: Almost Immediately after removing a car battery from a charger, the Voltage will Fall to around 12.6 to 13 Volts. Actually a 12 Volt Battery is Considered Dead at 10.5 volts Under a Typical Load. A 12 volt battery should be charged to about 14.5 volts for Cycled Use or to about 13.5 volts for Continuous Standby Use. Continuous Charging at 14,5 volts will damage the battery.

I don’t know if I could agree with you there. Bedini is one of the leading authorities on battery charging and his results are more meaningful that what is “supposed” to be the case.

Anyway, charging a battery to 14.5volts will only damage the battery if there is a lot of hot current. If you send the impulses to the battery to charge it, there are NO big bubbles on the plates you only see fine champaigne fizz. That alone is pricelss. There is NO heat in the battery, it remains stone cold. There is NO destruction to the plates, only a fine powder coating appears. The more the battery is drained from that kind of charge and then charged up again, it gets more and more efficient up to a certain point. You can take the battery, charge it with the radiant impulses and it will be MORE efficient than a brand new battery. It can power something longer, the battery isn’t being destroyed and will last virtually indefinitely.

You know the difference between a 24 month and 48 month battery? The only real difference is that there is more space at the bottom of the battery to catch more crap that has fallen off. If nothing falls off to begin with for example like a battery charged with the radiant impulses, it will last forever. (not the load powering capability from one charge, I’m talking about the physical integrity of the battery)…no more replacing batteries on a home unit, etc… ever!

Meyer sent these exact radiant impulses to his cell. There is NO current involved. Current will bridge one plate to the other or in a battery, current will make a closed loop from one terminal to the other. That automatically make a current charger or a regular electrolysis cell. If you send it impulses, the loop stays OPEN and no electron flow can happen. The water in the cell or the insides of the battery soak all of it up like a sponge. This is what you all need to do to copy Meyer’s method.

Simon, Posted: Sat Dec 18, 2004 7:53 pm Post subject:
qiman13 wrote: Meyer sent these exact radiant impulses to his cell. There is NO current involved. Current will bridge one plate to the other or in a battery, current will make a closed loop from one terminal to the other. That automatically make a current charger or a regular electrolysis cell. If you send it impulses, the loop stays OPEN and no electron flow can happen. The water in the cell or the insides of the battery soak all of it up like a sponge. This is what you all need to do to copy Meyer’s method.

when you say to use the scematic you posted for the berdini SG motor, do you have to use the coil as well of just that circuit…. sorry if its a dumb question im trying to figure this out in my head.

DORRO, Posted: Sun Dec 19, 2004 2:42 pm Post subject:
Hello again Qiman13. DAM GOOD to here from you…thought you had gone for good, but probably just very busy You were right, the peswiki site holds an awfull lot of important information, even more so in the last few days I think it’s fair to say that after Xmas there will be somebody in England with a front wheel missing…lol thanks again for all your posts….they seem somehow familiar…? Oh! btw it’s Bedini…and the coil is very important. it’s not my place to be picky however….no one likes a smart ass. no offence meant merry xmas to all….and all the best for the new year!

Freedomfuel, Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 1:04 pm Post subject:
Somehow I do not think that Qiman has figured out how to give the world clean abundant energy but he could be getting close to it.

THEORY: In my opinion the type of techniques that Qiman is interested in involve using ambient heat which is converted to useful energy in the form of ‘radient energy’ as he calls it. This is not as fanciful as it may sound because the paper below by Monstein and Wesley shows experimental proof for the existance of Longitudinal Electrodynamic Waves which could be the basis of current-less electricity. As ambient heat ultimately comes from the sun this technology could be regarded as a form of solar energy and thanks to global warming there could be giga-joules of excess solar energy in the atmoshere to be exploited.

Although the second law of thermodynamics expressly forbids the use of ambient heat to do work I think that it is possible in systems in thermodynamic disequilibrium with their environment which have the property of negative entropy.

That is entropy change dS =-kd InW = -dU/T
where W is a measure of dissorder in the system, U is heat imput, k is a constant and T is temperature.

In other words heat input into the system gives a decrease of temperature and an increase in order. In practice this occurs during abrupt discontinuities such as those caused by pulsed magnetic and electric fields. In the example of ‘free energy’ machines electrons organize themselves into clusters with a definite structure. A practical overunity device should thus exhibit a temperature difference compared to ambient temperature in proportion to the ratio of it’s input to it’s output. If someone did an experiment with a calorometer that confirmed that this is right it would disprove that the source of excess energy is ‘zero pont energy’.

PRACTICE: I cannot for the life of me see how the Bedini schoolgirl motor could be utilized in the electrolysis of water. Is this idea of Qiman based on experience or is it conjecture? As I have written elsewhere the underlying physics of Adams style pulsed motors and static electromagnetic over-unity devices could be the same but this is not much use if you need a practicle schematic, which Qiman has not supplied yet. The fundemental principle involved is that the back emf from a collapsing magnetic field is greater than the applied emf when the coil is linked to a ferrite magnet. Bluespark would do better to examine William Alek’s Motionless Battery Shock charger which could be applied to electrolysis with little modification. In my opinion this setup in which the coil/magnet are in parallel to the load could be how Meyer really obtained the results he did. Remember you need a diode in the circuit to ensure that the forward emf is blocked from the load (an electrolyzer in this case).

Below is a link to the Adams Motor Manual which describes in detail several experimental pulsed motors and static devices with one successful experiment described in enough detail that it could be replicated (at last!). Finally the figures that al has supplied would make sense to a highly experienced technician but they are mindboggling to me so it will take some time to figure out a reply.

REFERENCES : Adams Motor Nexus Article: http://www.geocities.com/Cape Canaveral/Lab1287/
The Adams Motor Guide : http://www.fortunecity.com/greenfield/bp/16/adamsmotorguide.htm
Motionless Shock Battery Charger : http://www.nuenergy.org/pdf/charger.pdf
Monstein and Wesley. Observations Of Scalar Longitudinal Electrodynamic Waves : http://www.astro.phys.ethz.ch/papers/monstein/7210.pdf
Joe McClain and Norman Wootan. Magnetic Resonance Amplifier : http://www.sumeria.net/free/mraintro.html
http://www.sumeria.net/free/mraop.html
http://rexresearch.com/mra/2mra.htm
On the Mystery Of Differential Negative Resistance : http://home.uaic.ro/~seba/the%20mystery%20of%20NDR.pdf
Adrian Akau. Longitudinal Waves and ‘Cold Electricity’ : http://www.faraday.ru/14-15.pdf

Freedomfuel, Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 1:15 pm Post subject: Re: electrolyte
qiman13 wrote: For the radiant, you definitely want square wave pulses going to the cell. An alternator isn’t going to give you any clean and crisp square waves. You could take the output of an alternator (before) the voltage regulator and simply make sure it is thru a bridge so it is DC and charge up a capacitor bank. From the capacitor bank, simply square wave pulse that directly to the cell. Since the bridge has diodes on the lead end anyway, you don’t need an extra “blocking diode.” That diode’s ONLY purpose is to prevent a reversal in the polarity….it automatically shows everyone that it is NOT an LC circuit. That isn’t even debatable. Anyway, alternator to caps to square wave pulser to cell.

I think that there is more to ‘radiant energy’ than just sqaure waves. High voltages seem to be involved and in the case of the Bedini and Adams motors there seems to be an electronic emission from the magnets themselves when pulsed with a magnet field of the same polarity. John Searl and Floyd Sweet regarded this emission as consisting of micron sized plasma rings or charge clusters which, according to Ken Shoulders, act as monopole radiators emitting scalar potential waves or ‘radiant energy’ as you call it. Incidentaly surely this would demagnetize the magnets?

Freedomfuel, Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 1:24 pm Post subject: Re: proof
qiman13 wrote: I already posted schematics, video clips, pictures, etc…EVERYTHING Some a**hole from here went in and deleted everything.

Regardless of how the gas is produced, you might as well have the setup ready to receive the power no matter how it is produced don’t you think I can tell you that no matter what power supply you have, Meyer’s type or other, if your cell isn’t sealed right and the magnetic fields from the wire are intefering with the gas produced, etc… you will NOT get results. Make the cell correctly FIRST.

Great, but how do you recommend a cell should be made before venturing into complicated electronics? I don’t think that I am asking for too much if I expect to see your statements backed up with some plans, photos or at least a detailed written description of a successful cell as others have done in this forum. I should say that I do intend to do some experiments with my own cell so but I am not going to get much help from you.

Also, you raised the subject of the influence of magnetic materials in the cell which is also a subject that concerns the Joe Cell builders. Can someone explain why residual ferro-magnetism should effect the fuction of the cell?

Freedomfuel, Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 1:27 pm Post subject: Re: H-O mix requirement
al wrote: qiman13, I am getting 24mi/gal at constant speed of 65mi/hr from my 1990, 4.9l, V8 Eldorado. Converting to liters (3.78 l/gal) my car uses 2.708 gal/hr or 10.24 l/hr. Gasoline weighs 1.55291 lb/l, converting 10.24 gives 15.6 lb/hr fuel consumption. Thanks, Al.

Great post al,but your figures are mind-boggling for someone who is not an experienced technician. I think that you deserve a reply but it could take me a while to figure it all out

bluespark, Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 2:48 pm Post subject:
Hi, freedomfuel, For me , seems that Quiman just want to help us with his experience ( remeber that he claims that successful had replicate Meyer’s cell ).

But, if you read attentively and perceive his philosophy (and it’s absolutely accurate) , we needs to merit his efforts. How many guys in this forum answered his call to start experimentation and let’s the math and physics for afterward ?

The physics only explains the results. It’s impossible to achieve results only by theory. Is necessary experimentation. A genius is 10% inspiration and 90% transpiration. Tesla worked in his lab not with theories but with arduous experimentation. Qiman convoke us to follow him through this work. He declared that we need start in order to merit more information. The Bedini device isn’t the ultimate way to replicate Meyer. It’s the more simple device that we can build in order to experiment radiant energy. We need to start to get more ! Come on guys.

DORRO, Posted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 5:05 am Post subject:
I am experimenting with a rather crude attempt at the monopole motor of John c. Bedini can anyone tell me how to upload a few photos to this thread? Thanks[/img]

djbANks, Posted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 6:52 pm Post subject:
2 cents: You could upload your images to a http://geocities.yahoo.com/ briefcase or maybe here:
http://www.imageshack.us/ then you would use the tag pointing to your image in your reply. Good luck I hope this helps.

DORRO, Posted: Wed Dec 22, 2004 6:28 am Post subject:
Thankyou djbANKS, Here is my attempt…..warts and all! any comments? am i getting warmer Qiman13?

Simon, Posted: Wed Dec 22, 2004 10:54 am Post subject:
how big is the gap between the coil and the magnet attached to the wheel?

DORRO, Posted: Wed Dec 22, 2004 5:03 pm Post subject:
Hi simon, The coil to magnet gap is about 15mm. The magnets are cylindrical and very powerful!!! My first attempt used square magnets, but they caused too much air resistance. The results were nearly the same but the r.p.m. was less.

These round magnets fit perfectly in 20mm holes bored in the wheel and cause little or no air movement. May i just say, I now realise that there is no such thing as free energy…….the other day a magnet lept from it’s mounting and smashed clean through a double glazed window unit costing me £150.00gbp.!!!!!….good job nobody was walking past eh?………Wheel r.p.m. approx 2000. Glad to answer any more questions. Dorro.

Simon, Posted: Thu Dec 23, 2004 10:10 am Post subject:
wow that looks pretty impressive! what is it made out of? some kind of plastic? it looks like the cutting board plastic….

DORRO, Posted: Thu Dec 23, 2004 4:50 pm Post subject:
Hi simon, The base plate and rotor are made from dense acetal resin, the side plates and timming pulley are made from polyethelene….mostly because working in the food industry that’s all i could beg, borrow or….ehem…..steal! most of the information is at http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Bedini_SG if you fancy a look.

Cheers and mery Christmas to to those that do….and seasons greetings to those that don’t

qiman13, Posted: Sat Mar 05, 2005 8:05 pm Post subject: radiant energy – wfc
Hi All, Glad to see someone try the Bedini energizer. Good job DORRO!!!
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Bedini_SG
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Bedini_SG/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bediniprocess/

Those 3 pages are probably the best besides John’s personal homepage: http://www.icehouse.net/john34/

Regarding the mathematics to see what is happening, you need to understand quaternions, which I do not understand and it is not really necessary to understand to have something that works. Regarding freedomfuel’s explanation of ambient heat turning into “radiant energy” or the excess energy. The answer is no.

If you take two magnets opposing each other and force them together, what is squeezing out from between them? That IS a scalar field. If south is opposing each other, what is squeezing out from the sides is a “super south pole” and if it is north opposing, then it is a super north pole. That super pole is 4 TIMES the strength of the attracting power if north was attracted to south. Get that 4 TIMES THE STRENGTH!!!

If you have magnets around a rotor, north facing out, all the south poles on all the magnets are facing inwards towards the center axle. All of those south fields are repelling each other are that SUPER SOUTH POLE is squeezing out in between each magnet. That super south pole is what is being ATTRACTED to the coil and that is what spins the rotor. The coil SUCKS that super south pole scalar field into the circuit transforming that scalar field into something usable in a battery that it is being taken to. That is not the only place the energy comes from but it is a very significant part of it.

One the rotor is up to speed and gets to resonance, the coil’s pulse is not repelling the magnets on the rotor to turn it, the super south pole is being attracted to the coil. What is happening is backwards from what everyone wants to believe.

The radiant energy is the heaviside component, which is the total energy flow over the wires that usually induces electron flow to begin with, which is usually only measured as the poynting flow. Bedini’s motors don’t have the electron flow and that is why they stay cold. You could say the radiant energy, WHICH STANLEY MEYER WAS USING TO PUT INTO HIS WFC, is the heaviside component void of electron flow.

The radiant output can be directly applied to a wfc or can be put in caps then rapidly pulsed into the cell. Look at Bedini’s SG circuit and meditate on it. Look at Meyer’s circuits and meditate on it. They are producing the same thing for differerent applications. Bedini’s is simpler, yet more effective in producing the radiant without all the chokes, etc… Follow all the messages in the posts in the above boards and you will learn EXACTLY what Meyer was producing to send to his wfc.

Bedini’s can be scaled up if you know what you’re doing. The output CAN be applied to a WFC. DORRO, glad you even tried the Bedini motor. Doing the SG circuit eliminates the need for a timing rotor with pulley to discharge caps and even eliminiates the need for caps. Since you at least made that one, get into the bediniprocess group (linked above) and send them your pic. You’ll be in the group in a flash. Bedini personally posts to that group and the bedini_sg yahoo group as well.

I haven’t had time to read the other threads in this website to see the progress others are making with their ideas, but I just hope they’re still not stuck on seeing Meyer’s circuit as being an LC resonant circuit on the wfc side. Blocking diode prevents the resonance. UNIDIRECTIONAL LONGITUDINAL RADIANT IMPULSES TO THE WFC. That is the EXACT answer to what Meyer was doing everyone. Take it or leave it.

IMPORTANT – Meyer’s circuit IS an open circuit and NOT a closed circuit. The radiant is unidirectionally pumped to the water and shut off before the polarity reverses. The water absorbes the radiant (over and over and over). It is the EXACT thing Bedini is doing with the batteries he is charging. The battery is receiving unidirectional longitudinal impulses and it is shut off before there is any reversal. The battery just absorbes the radiant (over and over and over).

If Bedini’s or Meyer’s circuits were closed loops, then there would be current that would actually bridge the gap inside the battery and inside the wfc forcing it back to it’s own ground meaning that the loop got closed and that lets electrons flow in the circuit in the opposite direction killing the power source.

The motor is unity motor but the EXCESS (over 100% energy) winds up in the battery being charged. NOT measurable in the circuit. Nobody will measure excess energy in Meyer’s circuit either! It will only show up in the water or at least in the work that comes from the gas in the end.

I’ve repeated the above over and over because it is the truth. Also, I can’t emphasize enough, get SECRETS OF COLD WAR TECHNOLOGY by GERRY VASSILATOS and read chapter 1 over and over. You will see what everything I have said is true. it will be just too obvious. 2 main components to the project. One is a circuit to produce the radiant. One is the actual wfc with all the plumbing. Get them both right separately. If you want to build the wfc first, forget about how to produce the radiant. Just hook a variac thru a bridge and pu the output to the wfc with condentric steel tubes. You will impress yourself with the gas production. You can’t not get those results. It isn’t efficient, but who cares. You have gas production. Now get the system to be safe and get the back flash bubbler setup, etc… and just make sure the plumbing is all safe and sound. Eagle Research’s browns gas books are good for building a safe cell. Get them books!

After you have all the plumbing safe and you can produce gas that goes out a nozzle and you can have it burn a steady flame, then you have a good wfc for safe experimentation. Use you common sense and use all safety precautions. Eagle Research’s brown gas books have already saved my life. Literally! I didn’t realize how powerful this gas is.

Don’t do this: I put a few drops of dish soap into the wfc and applied the power. Got a good big bubble. My friend dropped a match on it and it was louder than an M80 going off in front of your face. Anyway, there is no question that you will have a very powerful explosive gas.

Anyway, after you have all the plumbing safe on the cell, then learn how to build a radiant circuit. In the links above is all that is necessary to do that. Or build a radiant circuit first then do the cell. Just get one done right first then do the next.

If you just build a circuit and put it to a cell, well, that is just kinda halfed ass. Anyway, MANY people are getting incredible results with Bedini’s radiant circuits. Over 100% efficient is no problem. Remember, you won’t measure it in the motor you’ll see it in work that is done with the batteries that you charge. Not only that, that doesn’t even account for about a 25% in work at the rotor that doesn’t even cost any work to do! Minimum 125% efficient including the work at the wheel that PLUS the excess in the batteries you’re charging.

Just picture a wfc in place of batteries you’re charging or both! You won’t produce enough radiant with small one coil setup. You’ll need multi coils, etc… Just follow the info in the links above and you’ll see what I mean. This is the real deal and is probably the easiest true radiant circuit that anyone can build without all the BS. Good luck everyone!

Freedomfuel, Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 12:37 pm Post subject:
I want to try one of these overunity motors out of curiosity but if I do it will probably be a varient of the Adams motor which is quite similar to the Bedini Monopole motor. Here is a link showing lots of home made Adams

Motors you can copy which would give even the most hardened sceptic hours of fun: The Adams Motor Guide http://www.fortunecity.com/greenfield/bp/16/adamsmotorguide.htm

DORRO used insulaing materials to build his motor out of necessity but according to this article it is necessary to use insulating materials for the rotor to get the best results. I believe that this is because when a pulsed magnetic field is applied to a dielectric it produces an electron cascade in the surrounding air which is visisble in the dark as a pink or blue glow around the motor. The stripping of electrons from O2 molecules is strongly endothermic and cools the air around the motor thus contributing to the cool running of successful motors. The fact that these motors can actually cool below ambient temperature suggests that they are able to convert low grade heat into useful energy which is suppsed to be imposible. Here is a link to one of Hal Puthoffs experiments showing this electron cascade visible in a glow discharge panel:
http://www.earthtech.org/experiments/gdp/cursory.html

Most of QIMAN’s interpretation of what is going on in these devices is probably correct except for the bit about magnets which I have not seen before. My interpretation is based on remarks made by Sweet concerning his VTA device. According to Sweet when a opposing magnetic field is rapidly applied to a ceramic or ferrite magnet stresses inside the magnet produce an effect like fracto-emission in which electrons are released as torroidal or vortical clusters. As they decay they emit scalar longitudinal electric waves which in his device are picked up by a non-inductive bifalar wound coil and travel along the outside of conductors as if they were wave guides. Since this excess energy is not electricity it cannot be measured directly but it is possible to measure the work it does in heating a filament in a calorimeter for instance. I think that it is this fact which the sceptics cannot understand when they demand evidence of overunity as more current out than comes in.

Here is a rather fanciful discussion of the physics involved in this kind of device: C.P. Kouropoulos. Classicaly Bound Electrons – EV’s, Exotic Chemistry, and ‘Cold Electricity’ http://www.mypage.bluewin.ch/Bizarre/EVs.htm

I am considering building this really easy overunity batery charger which has been successfuly replicated by at least two others: M Charly’s SEBCAR http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:SEBCAR

I have already bought materials for a Browns Gas Cell so I could use this circuit as a pulsed supply to obtain ‘radient energy. LET THE EXPERIMENTS BEGIN!

qiman13, Posted: Mon Mar 07, 2005 8:49 pm Post subject: radiant
Hi Freedomfuel, The Adams motor is actually not overunity no matter what the data says. One important thing to understand is that the radiant energy in a radiant circuit is not even measurable. The meters can only measure the voltage potential and/or the current involving electron flow. The meters therefore are only measuring current of energy that is being wasted. When many of these people show meters showing more output current than input, that is not measuring any of the excess radiant because that is impossible with the meters. The radiant can be considered neutral therefore no meters will read it. The meters showing more out than in is nothing more than a metering trick that the inventors don’t even understand that they are not getting an accurate reading. See the modified Marcus Wagner circuit in the Bedini boards and you will see a classic example of this.

Here is the only true test to validate if a device is overunity. Bedini’s motor is actually a unity device and is not overunity. The overunity shows up in the battery being charged. Actually, Bedini’s motor does have overunity because there is work being done in the rotor that does not cost any work from the input battery and it is about 25% in torque…but we don’t count that…we count what the battery being charged can deliver in actual real work.
1. measure in joules the work that the input battery expended over x time.
2. measure work in joules that the battery getting charged can do until it gets to the voltage where it was before it was charged with the radiant energy. When you see more joules in work delivered from the battery getting charged, then you can confirm overunity. This of course can only be done AFTER the battery is charged. There is no measuring anything while the energizer is running because no meters can read the radiant heaviside component. meters on the motors like adams, etc…those are not overunity devices. They are very efficient pulsed motors and stay very cool, but they are definitely not overunity. Remember, it is a metering trick. I can make the meters show what I want but they don’t tell what is happening.

None of the Bedini motors have insulated rotors. There is however a point to consider…if the rotor is metal, use non-ferrous metal like aluminum or use plastic. If the rotor is iron, etc… it will interfere with the magnetic fields, etc…

Interesting about the electron cascade you mention with the rotor. I suppose it is possible. The radiant (almost the entire amount of radiant that is usable in the end) comes from the scalar component of the opposing magnetic fields.

There is some validity to the heat you mention. Bedini and others don’t mention it but with entopy or resistance, heat is emitted in the form of photon energy (infrared for example). With negentropic motor or negative resistance, which is what the Bedini motor exibits, photon energy can probably be diverged towards the circuit, which yes is “supposed” to be impossible. I’m sure the effect is there but not sure how much it accounts for.

See Bedini’s patent on his cd clarifier that uses opposing magnetic fields, the scalar component hits the cd surface and “aligns” the material on the disk so the laser can read more accurately what is on the disk. That is just one application. John had it on his website in detail when it focused on quaternions for a bit, but he took that off for now.

Floyd Sweet by the way was one of Bedini’s mentors. Bedini wound his coils for him, etc… Bedini was VERY close to Floyd Sweet.

I saw that before aobut the cold electricity. Don’t know if I agree with that persons explanation but it is interesting.

Kemeny Tibor I believe has an interesting patent on a circuit that has the cold electricity (heaviside component with no electrons, therefore no detectable poynting flow). I don’t believe the Sebcar is overunity. Please don’t go by the meters. Measure input joules and measure the joules that the battery getting charged can produce AFTER it is charged. If it is more than the input joules, then it is an overunity producing device. That is the ONLY true test. joules vs. joules – meters mean nnothing. I’ll post something interesting in the near future. Stay tuned.

qiman13, Posted: Mon Mar 07, 2005 8:55 pm Post subject: wfc measuring
In the wfc, meters mean nothing as well and volumes of gas mean nothing either.
1. measure input joules over x time.
2. measure joules in work that the gas produces AFTER it was produced
3. if joules in work from gas is more than input joules, then that confirms overunity gas production. meters, volumes of gas, etc.. mean nothing. joules vs. joules is the ONLY true measurement to verify overunity.

qiman13, Posted: Tue Mar 08, 2005 2:02 pm Post subject: THE answer to the radiant circuit
small excerpt from http://www.icehouse.net/john34/index.html

Study that page if you want the real answer to the radiant circuit.
This is the #1 page on the entire internet to explain exactly what the radiant energy in a circuit is AND how to build one.

Contained below are the 2 most important statements ever made regarding energy in circuits and Gabriel Kron made both.

Gabriel Kron was a mentor of Floyd Sweet. Floyd Sweet was a mentor of John Bedini.
————————————
Gabriel Kron 1901 to 1968
Kron, Gabriel. “…the missing concept of “open-paths” (the dual of “closed-paths”) was discovered, in which currents could be made to flow in branches that lie between any set of two nodes. (Previously — following Maxwell — engineers tied all of their open-paths to a single datum-point, the ‘ground’). That discovery of openpaths established a second rectangular transformation matrix… which created ‘lamellar’ currents…” “A network with the simultaneous presence of both closed and open paths was the answer to the author’s years-long search.”

Gabriel Kron, “The Frustrating Search for a Geometrical Model of Electrodynamic Networks,” Journal unk., issue unk., circa 1962, p. 111-128. The quote is from p. 114. Lamellar currents, these are branch currents flowing along the nodes in layers, they may be tapped off to form real EM power once transformed. The only way I have found to capture these currents is when the inductors become negative value, the same for semiconductors. They are thin currents of zero potential under measurement. Lamellar currents when transformed in branches become very powerful in charge.
John Bedini
———————————–

Kron, Gabriel. . “When only positive and negative real numbers exist, it is customary to replace a positive resistance by an inductance and a negative resistance by a capacitor (since none or only a few negative resistances exist on practical network analyzers.)” Gabriel Kron, “Numerical solution of ordinary and partial differential equations by means of equivalent circuits.” Journal of Applied Physics, Vol. 16, Mar. 1945a, p. 173.

THIS IS THE ANSWER ALL YOU MEYERS FANS NEED TO UNDERSTAND HIS CIRCUITS. (fyi…Kron was REQUIRED by the censors to insert the words “none or” above. THE INDUCTANCE THAT REPLACES THE POSITIVE RESISTANCE IS THE PRIMARY COIL IN THE CIRCUIT! In Bedini’s or Meyer’s circuits. THE CAPACITOR IS THE BATTERY BEING CHARGED OR IT CAN BE A WFC, WHICH MEYERS CALLS A ***CAPACITOR***.

A capacitor is meant to absorb energy and an electrolysis cell is meant to be a bridge for current. The WFC ABSORBES the radiant impulses and it is not an electrolysis cell becuase current doesn’t bridge the gap. If it bridged the gap, it would close the loop and electron flow would be permitted in the opposite direction. This doesn’t happen though and it is why the circuit actually stays open.

These radiant circuits turn chaos into order. Most circuits that produce heat take something in order and dissipate it into chaos. So instead of high potential moving to low it takes low potential and moves it to a high potential.
————————–

http://www.cheniere.org/techpapers/on_the_principles_of_permissible.htm

The “Final Word” On the Conservation of Energy Law. Some arch skeptics are fanatically die-hard—and a real pain in the neck as well. To be absolutely precise, they have no leg to stand on, if they accept what physics ultimately says on the subject of energy conservation.

Before one gets too adamant about the universality of energy conservation, here’s a most astonishing thing, but quite true: In general relativity there is at basis no such thing as conservation of energy at all, unless one first makes some assumptions to inject it artificially so as to avoid facing the sheer terror of the collapse of energy conservation!

The great Hilbert pointed this out shortly after the advent of Einstein’s theory of general relativity. E.g., quoting from Logunov and Loskutov { [42] }, p. 179:
“In formulating the equivalence principle, Einstein actually abandoned the idea of the gravitational field as a Faraday-Maxwell field, and this is reflected in the pseudotensorial characterization of the gravitational field that he introduced. Hilbert was the first to draw attention to the consequences of this. In Ref. 2 [D. Hilbert, Gottingen Nachrichten, Vol. 4, 1917, p. 21] he wrote: ‘I assert… that for the general theory of relativity, i.e., in the case of general invariance of the Hamiltonian function, energy equations… corresponding to the energy equations in orthogonally invariant theories do not exist at all. I could even take this circumstance as the characteristic feature of the general theory of relativity.’ Unfortunately, this remark of Hilbert was evidently not understood by his contemporaries, since neither Einstein himself nor other physicists recognized the fact that in general relativity conservation laws for energy, momentum, and angular momentum are in principle impossible.”
http://www.cheniere.org/correspondence/052303.htm

So one must understand that a “permanent magnet” is actually a permanent broken symmetry in the fierce flux of the vacuum, and it thus continuously extracts and outpours real, observable magnetic energy, from the very definition of broken symmetry.

We point this out because rigorously this process reveals that the permanent magnet is actually an active dynamics system, or what is called in thermodynamics a nonequilibrium steady state (NESS) dissipative system. As such, the known thermodynamics of such systems far from equilibrium with their active environment does permit and allow any of five “magic” functions. Specifically, such a NESS system can (1) self-order (produce energy seeming from nowhere), (2) self-oscillate or self-rotate, (3) output more energy than the operator inputs (the excess energy is freely received and transduced from the active environment), (4) exhibit self-powering (all the energy is freely received and transduced from the active environment), and (5) exhibit negative entropy.

Simply things out on dissipative systems in the recent book, Kondepudi and Prigogine, Modern Thermodynamics: From Heat Engines to Dissipative Structures, Wiley, 1998 (published with corrections in 1999).

Further, the second law of thermodynamics has known violations, one being sharp gradients (Kondepudi and Prigogine, ibid., p. 459. The exchange force is just such a sharp gradient, and it does violate the received form of the second law of thermodynamics (which has many other violations as well, as recently shown). About such sharp gradients, Kondepudi and Prigogine state dryly that “Not much is known either experimentally or theoretically”.

qiman13, Posted: Wed Mar 09, 2005 5:49 pm Post subject: continued in other group
This topic is continuing here: http://www.icubenetwork.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=223
Focusing on the radiant production. Not just talk…I’ll show you step by step how to make it. Plain and simple.

qiman13, Posted: Fri Mar 11, 2005 11:24 am Post subject: wfc test…only 1 tube connected.
From last september… http://icubenetwork.com/files/watercar/non-commercial/qiman13/celltest.mpg

harvich, Posted: Sat Mar 12, 2005 7:36 am Post subject: V & A Inputs?
Is this input voltage and amperage data available and is it Pulsed DC? Harvich

Tesla Research Group; Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances http://groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/

qiman13, Posted: Sat Mar 12, 2005 1:42 pm Post subject: data
Please go here for the continuation of posts for this group. http://www.icubenetwork.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=223

Freedomfuel, Posted: Sun Mar 13, 2005 12:39 pm Post subject: Re: radiant energy – wfc
qiman13 wrote: Regarding freedomfuel’s explanation of ambient heat turning into “radiant energy” or the excess energy. The answer is no.

If you take two magnets opposing each other and force them together, what is squeezing out from between them? That IS a scalar field. If south is opposing each other, what is squeezing out from the sides is a “super south pole” and if it is north opposing, then it is a super north pole. That super pole is 4 TIMES the strength of the attracting power if north was attracted to south. Get that 4 TIMES THE STRENGTH!!!

If you have magnets around a rotor, north facing out, all the south poles on all the magnets are facing inwards towards the center axle. All of those south fields are repelling each other are that SUPER SOUTH POLE is squeezing out in between each magnet. That super south pole is what is being ATTRACTED to the coil and that is what spins the rotor. The coil SUCKS that super south pole scalar field into the circuit transforming that scalar field into something usable in a battery that it is being taken to. That is not the only place the energy comes from but it is a very significant part of it.

One the rotor is up to speed and gets to resonance, the coil’s pulse is not repelling the magnets on the rotor to turn it, the super south pole is being attracted to the coil. What is happening is backwards from what everyone wants to believe.

Your ideas concerning the importance of like magnetic poles being forced together are interesting because the significance of this in these kinds of devices is usually overlooked. I am not sure about the ‘super south pole’ you believe results from this arrangement. Surely this super south pole would be in the middle of the rotor and hardly affected by the puses from the electromagnet otside it’s perimeter? My interpretation of what is happening here is that by forcing magnetic like poles into opposition you are creating a certain stress like a spring being compressed so that only a small pulse can cause the domains to toggle back and forth. This toggling could actually be an example of negative resistance because like a toggle switch as force is applied there is no movement untill a point where it suddenly yields and the applied force decreases with an increase in distance. The PAGD device by the Correas exhibits this quality as shown by their graph in this paper:
http://www.aetherometry.com/PAGD/PwrfromAEemissions.html

Your comments could be a valuable insight for pulse motor builders. Maybe they should make the disc of the rotor a smaller diameter so that the like magnet poles are closer together in the middle of the rotor. Your ideas about magnets being ‘nonequilibrium steady state (NESS) dissipative systems’ are new to me and I think I should do some research into magnet theory to catch up with you. Here is a link to papers on magnets that includes the basic theory they teach at college as well as the things they don’t want you to know:
http://www.intalek.com/Index/Projects/Library/Library.htm

I take my understanding of what is happenning in the magnets according to the teachings of Moray King in his books on the subject of free energy. According to him what occurs in the magnet that gives it this property ‘nonequilibrium steady state dissapative system’ occurs only when the magnet is stressed in certain ways and this property belongs not so much to the magnet as to electron clusters that are released inside it. He supports this hypothesis by citing the work of Floyd Sweet who deliberately conditioned the magnet by stressing it in order to open up microscopic fissures within it.

The two most obvious ways in which these Bedini and Adams pulsed motors could be taking energy from the environment are that they are drawing upon ambient heat and electricity. This is supposed to be impossible according to the second law of thermodynamics because a homogenouse, randomly orrientated radiation cannot be a source of energy. There has to be a gradient so that more energetic radiation can move down to a low energy sink in order for work to be done. Likewise randomly distributed electric charges cannot be a source of energy untill they are separated and a potential gradient formed. It is rather like water flowing downwards to sea level. I hypothesise that these are indeed negative entropy devices and their cooling below ambient temperature is like a thermal well into which ambient heat flows and they are also electric potential wells causing an electric field that accelerates positive and neutral particles towards the device evident as a glow in the air around it in low light. There is also a third more important way in which they take energy from the environment but I have not figured that out yet. I take my understanding of what is happening at this deeper level from the teachings of Moray King in his books on the subject of zero point energy. He hypothesizes that electrons as torroidal or vortical clusters cohere the homegenous, randomly orientated zero point radiation. Others hypothesise that electrons in this extreme state continuously experience an interchange between mass and energy. Ken shoulders has suggested that electron clusters give up some of their binding mass as excess energy.

Anyone who has read this far will probably be wondering what any of this has to do with water cars. Since Browns Gas is the crucial catalyst required for ‘extreme mileage’ and it is not produced by movement of ions within the water by regular electrolysis then it is possible as Qiman says to use these ‘cold electricity’ techniques to increase the efficiency of Browns Gas production. Once electricity is freed from it’s kinetic component it becomes much more efficient in it’s applications – more than 100% efficient it seems. Even if you could use these techniques to make Hydrogen from electrolysis at more than 90% efficiency it would be a great boon for mankind and could make you incredibly wealthy.

You are giving us some great posts QIMAN with plenty of new ideas to chew over. Now lets see what it is you are doing right with your electrolysis experiments.

qiman13, Posted: Sun Mar 13, 2005 2:53 pm Post subject: reply
Hi Freedomfuel, I replied here: http://www.icubenetwork.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=223&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0