Secrets_of_the_Water_Cell_Explained.pdf

qiman13

Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 3:31 pm Post subject: Secrets of the Water Cell Explained!!!

Hi Everyone, new to the board but have somethings I want to bring to the surface.

Below was posted in Dave's Cell folder. I added more below that.

----------

Hi Gary, what material is your plates or tubes made from? I use t304 steel tube setup and I get no gunk. The

only thing that even appears to corrode are the non ss leads that connect to the positive tubes.

Also, if getting gunk, then most likely you are getting too much regular electrolysis. The idea is to prevent

current from doing that. Therefore, no oxygen can go to your positive plates/tubes and oxidize them.

I'm new to the group and would like to tell you that I have a circuit virtually idential to SM's. It was developed

by someone that I have learned from over the years. It isn't used to make fuel from water but is used to charge

batteries overunity. I can post the schematics soon as appropriate. I also have other info to share if you're

interested.

The circuit is not a resonant circuit. The water doesn't go into some magical resonance. The blocking diode

should be telling you all something. No resonance (at least not the circuit). The voltage never drops to negative.

What is the difference between a transverse wave and a longitudinal impulse?

http://www.gmi.edu/~drussell/Demos/waves/wavemotion.html

and

http://www.glenbrook.k12.il.us/gbssci/phys/Class/sound/u11l1b.html

and

http://www.glenbrook.k12.il.us/gbssci/phys/mmedia/waves/lw.html

3 very good basic examples. Unidirectional DC pulses are not transverse waves. They are longitudinal impulses.

The whole secret is sending TIME IMPULSES to the water.

What the goal is is to pump the water with radiant energy. This is nothing but pure voltage potential with no

current. When it is done right, you can create the voltage potentials without ever inducing electrons to flow to

begin with. How? We'll get to that. Imagine not having all the problems of having to restrict amps. I will be

happy to share this with anyone who is serious.

Let me know what you think.

I'm also looking for copies of the two Stanley Meyer videos and the book. If anyone can get me copies, I would

be extremely grateful. Even if nobody can get me these, I'll still share my info with you all.

Take care!

----------------------------------------------------

I've observed in this board some comments I would like to comment on.

I saw that someone mentioned that Meyer was flawed in saying the inductor increases frequency. That isn't a

flaw, of course it increases frequency when a pulsed input is put into it and there is a blocking diode. One pulse

is given and it goes through the blocking diode, charges the inductor and gets to the cell with less amps. That is

one pulse. When the pulse is cut off, the inductor collapses in the SAME direction because the blocking diode

prevents it from going opposite polarity and this is pulse #2 going to the cell. You paid for one and got 2 pulses.

For example, lets just stick to straight wall cycle. 60hz going into the bridge to turn it into pulsed dc will be

120hz pulsed dc. Remember that there is one dc pulse for each half othe ac. 120 hz pulsed into the inductor will

get 240hz at the cell. So, the freuency is increased by using the inductor. Of course we want higher frequency

than this, but this is only for an example.

The secret is pumping radiant energy into the water and this puts it into a higher energy state. You're swelling

the water up with the Aether.

Each time a coil is given a pulse, there will be a certain volt and amp over a certain time. When the pulse is shut

off, the collapsed SPIKE is pure voltage potential with no current. That is why it is virtually a straight line.

You're converting work back into potential. The spike is time compressed energy...pure Aetheric potential or

radiant energy. Think about it...you're turning work back into potential. It is the radiant potential that you are

wanting to pump into the water unidirectionally.

Frequencies are important but that is a case by case situation. Based on cell spacing, material of it, voltage, etc...

there will of course be optimal frequencies for each system and they will all be different. It has nothing to do

with a magical frequency that water will mysteriously separate at. There are frequencies that can do that but that

isn't what Meyer was doing I don't believe.

It is essential to understand what energy is and that energy is NOT the capacity to do work, what electricity is

and to realize that there is no such thing as electricity...electricity is truly an adjective to describe an

event...where the source charge comes from and for example if you power your system with batteries, the charge

does NOT come from the inside of the battery...it is important to understand what a dipole is and how a dipole

gets a flow over wires. It is a myth that we don't know where the source charge comes from. These things are

really necessary to duplicate something but if you understand the above and a little more, it will be

overwhelmingly obvious what Meyer was doing. It is obvious he didn't know but he still got results.

The patents are there to give the concept, not the actual working model. Same as the xogen patents. It will not

work using the exact same circuit and input of 12v, etc... that shows the concept of what they are using but that

doesn't mean their working models are that same circuit.

For example, the battery charging method I'm using for overunity gain...this is how to measure it. measure the

joules of input energy from the input source over a given time. When the battery is charged, power a resistive

load (light bulb) from it and measure the joules being used to light that bulb until the battery is back down to the

voltage that it was before charging. The joules will be more than what left the input source. This is overunity.

Hundreds of % in fact and up to a few thousand is possible without a doubt.

This is what the fakes out there want you to measure: Well lets measure the input and hook meters to the output

of the circuit and measure that hundreds of volts, etc... that is all BS. The ONLY honest way to test this kind of

thing is measuring WORK. Measure work in and then measure usable work AFTER the battery is charged. You

can't directly measure potential like this with devices becaue there aren't any devices that can measure pure

Aether. The devices we use .... and this is important... only measure wasted energy. They all want to hook the

output of the circuit back into the input source (battery) or whatever and have it run itself. That is

ridiculous...that closes the loop and kills the dipole.

Anyway, this is my 2 cents.

There is one book that spells out word for word what Meyer's is doing, what Gray did, etc... that is chapter one

on Tesla in this book: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0932813801/yokotahighschool

That book was used as a Rosetta stone to cracks Grays patents and therefore revealed some of Teslas secrets.

Looking forward to all of your input.

Thanks and I'll look foward to comparing notes on devices you're all building.

qiman13

Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 4:58 pm Post subject: correction

I meant to say that it is NOT necessary to know about what a dipole is, etc... to make the things work. It is only

necessary to easily see what Meyer and other were doing.

Murray

Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2004 3:04 am Post subject:

Hi Qiman

I converted the international news release briefings by Stanley A Meyer on the water fuel cell to PDF and

laserline has uploaded them for all to see. thanks mate

http://www.icubenetwork.com/files/watercar/non-commercial/stanley_meyer/

worth a read

Murray

_________________

Imagination is more important than the knowledge.

The knowledge is limited and the imagination is not. (Albert Einstein)

Murray

Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2004 4:34 am Post subject:

I thought this was interesting and has some relevance.

refer to links

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/5322/ind-kick.htm

Quote:

It is possible to step-up voltage without using a transformer. The property of an inductor to build up

a high counter-electromotive force (cemf) can be used to flash gas discharge tubes and light neon

bulbs and small tubes from very small batteries. All you need

to do is connect a fairly large inductor (.5mH or higher works best) in parallel to the bulb or tube

and then attach the inductor to a square wave pulse generator. The result should be the tube or bulb

glowing, sometimes very brightly depending on the inductor used, the input voltage/current, pulse

rate, and the bulb or tube characteristics. It is important to have the neon bulb, etc. lighting, if it

doesn't the cemf will come back to the output transistor and possibly ruin it. When the bulb is

glowing the gas is a low resistance, therefore shorting the cemf. The bulb or tube you use will also

protect the rest of the circuit. For the pulse generator, a low frequency 555 timer circuit or signal

generator will do. Experiment with the inductor, I have gotten neon bulbs to give off almost white

light.

also this is some good info on the dc resonate charging circuit

http://www.richieburnett.co.uk/dcreschg.html#resonant

I am with you! and have came to very similar conclusions, now we just have to prove it.

Murray

_________________

Imagination is more important than the knowledge.

The knowledge is limited and the imagination is not. (Albert Einstein)

Gary

Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2004 8:57 am Post subject:

Hi Guys, that "richieburnett" link above in Murray's post explains the dc resonant charging circuit very clearly,

leaving no room for misinterpretaion at all.

Qiman, you can see that the frequency is NOT doubled, but the dc supply voltage across the capacitor is! You

can see what Meyer was trying to achieve with this, doubling the supply voltage pulses while the inductor

naturally limits the current - it even shows the step charging sequence. This explanation of the circuit is far, far

better than anything Stan ever wrote in his wild babblings.

The blocking diode simply serves to stop the capacitor discharging in the opposite direction through the

inductor once the capacitor is fully charged.

As I see it, the flaw with this circuit when applied by old Stan to his wfc is that of course, the wfc is NOT much

of a capacitor, more of a resistor.

Pure water makes a great dielectric, with a dielectric constant of around 80 and a breakdown voltage in the order

of thousands of volts per mm, but tap water conducts very well as we all know. Just 240v mains provides a very

healthy current - or unhealthy if you happen to be in the bath when the hair dryer drops in!!!

Having said all that I intend to play about with the dc resonant charging circuit and do some proper tests as it

might be there is enough of a capacitance to still provide a substantial step charging effect. I don't really expect

this to be the case tho as the resistance offered by my electrode set up is at best much less than 1 ohm!

However, I find that putting things actually into practice often throws up info, ideas and insights that don't

always reveal themselves on paper.

All the best

_________________

regards, Gary.

qiman13

Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2004 1:40 pm Post subject: What a dipole really is

Gary, I can understand your explanation of charge carriers, etc...

Let me ask you this...when you measure voltage...what are you measuring? Electron charge or voltage potential?

They are two totally different things.

First of all, where does the source charge come from? Isn't that the big mystery with "electricity?" We all are

told and we can all observe what this mysterious charge does but no textbook can explain where it comes from?

I believe it is cruicial to understand what a dipole is. Of course it is something with two poles. If the poles have

a balanced potential, there is no movement possible. I think we can agree on that. If one potential is higher and

one lower, then there is obviously movement capability. I think we can agree on that too.

Now, lets look at the most common dipole that we use all the time. A battery.

It is claimed that the electrolytes in a battery create some chemical reaction that produces an electrical charge

and this electrical charge is what goes out of the battery and over the wires and powers whatever is connected to

the battery. This would of course be a bare bones explanation of what a battery is.

Is this really what is happening?

It is important to understand what the Aether is. Michaelson/Morlay spelling?? have already been disproven

long ago. They have also been proven to have miscalculated what they were doing when they "proved" there is

no Aether, which is absolutely ridiculous. So in fact, there is an Aether just as Einstein predicted. In fact, the

Aether does exist as Tesla knew way before and at a much higher level than Einstein ever did.

We know that there is unlimited vacuum energy...infinite potential available in 3d space and time. It is

Plik z chomika:

Inne pliki z tego folderu:

Inne foldery tego chomika: