Central implosive electrolysis

Tips, advice and tips to lower your consumption, processes or inventions as unconventional engines: the Stirling engine, for example. Patents improving combustion: water injection plasma treatment, ionization of the fuel or oxidizer.
sicetaitsimple
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9746
Registration: 31/10/16, 18:51
Location: Lower Normandy
x 2622

Re: Central implosive electrolysis




by sicetaitsimple » 17/11/23, 17:53

GuyGadeboisLeRetour wrote:
Ahmed wrote:Rather than Facom, good but expensive, I would recommend "Béta", an Italian brand which produces a whole range of quality tools at a fair price. However, I don't know if it includes electrodes and drill bits...

Hazet, a German brand, is also very good.


Ahmed and Guy, you are off topic! Let's concentrate, please....
0 x
User avatar
GuyGadeboisTheBack
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 14597
Registration: 10/12/20, 20:52
Location: 04
x 4202

Re: Central implosive electrolysis




by GuyGadeboisTheBack » 17/11/23, 18:12

Ok. In fact we could take advantage of the current going in both directions by using this dual channel. We don't do it because we are formatted and we have clown brains and as a result we only use half the energy, like the idiots we are. Am I good?
1 x
sicetaitsimple
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9746
Registration: 31/10/16, 18:51
Location: Lower Normandy
x 2622

Re: Central implosive electrolysis




by sicetaitsimple » 17/11/23, 18:14

GuyGadeboisLeRetour wrote: Am i good?

I don't know, but your effort is worthy!
1 x
sicetaitsimple
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9746
Registration: 31/10/16, 18:51
Location: Lower Normandy
x 2622

Re: Central implosive electrolysis




by sicetaitsimple » 17/11/23, 20:49

and what does Ahmed say?
He seems clever, with his sawdust paper press, in the face of so many revelations....
You just have to use half a brain at a time, and never sleep. the recipe is simple.
2 x
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12274
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2930

Re: Central implosive electrolysis




by Ahmed » 17/11/23, 22:26

: Oops: : Oops: : Oops: : Oops: : Oops: ...
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
User avatar
peter
Éconologue good!
Éconologue good!
posts: 363
Registration: 25/10/23, 13:51
x 20

Re: Central implosive electrolysis




by peter » 18/11/23, 06:53

In Young's Cleft experiment,
they note that the Electron does not divide...in the presence of an Observer.

It can only divide if it is “WAVE”!
Not “Corpuscular”.

But...who is asking the question what an OBSERVER is?
Nobody ?

Simple.
An Observer is a “pile of Matter” ENVELOPED by an Electric Field!
This electric field probably has an INFLUENCE on this electron preventing it from dividing.

Recently I told you about Electric Fields coupled between a Human and a Bottle of Water more than 6 m away!!
This also applies to ANY material made of metal and electronic parts called "Camera" or "Observer".

Moreover, the FORMULA for Calculating the Speed ​​of the Electron, in a conducting wire, supposed to be at the Speed ​​of LIGHT....
is ONLY VALID if this electron is in “WAVE” form!!
...and therefore is NOT...valid if it is in "Corpuscular" form.

So, given the DISRUPTIVE character of the "Observer", if we want to MEASURE an electric current,
so that the calculation of the current at the Speed ​​of Light is...VALID...well PHYSICALLY, you should not bring the cables near
to measure them...

...otherwise YOU...yes YOU with YOUR measuring devices...you will prevent the Electrons in the cable from being in Wave Form,
and therefore move at the Speed ​​of Light...otherwise it will FALSE your measurements.
Oh well yes....
If you WANT to respect the Calculation Formulas, imposed by Science and duly established...
so it’s like that!

: Mrgreen:

PS: don't forget to include in your "CURRENT" measurements, the 2 FORCES going in opposite directions, in a cable,
basically, mathematically, you should practically MULTIPLY the result of your measurements by 2...
oh well yes, otherwise it would be “electronic racism” eh…discrimination.
: Lol:
0 x
User avatar
peter
Éconologue good!
Éconologue good!
posts: 363
Registration: 25/10/23, 13:51
x 20

Re: Central implosive electrolysis




by peter » 18/11/23, 07:39

Just a detail...

The theoretical measurement of a current in a conducting wire is rather crude!

Given the metallurgical quality of metal working, melting, cooling speed, establishment of crystallization
metal atoms
stretching, impurities...etc.

Translation:

The theory is only valid in the PURE and PERFECT world of theory...which does not include all the factors of the real world.
0 x
sicetaitsimple
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9746
Registration: 31/10/16, 18:51
Location: Lower Normandy
x 2622

Re: Central implosive electrolysis




by sicetaitsimple » 18/11/23, 12:28

Ahmed wrote:: Oops: : Oops: : Oops: : Oops: : Oops: ...

Must follow! We're talking about a very simple thing, you inject 18W into it and it produces 65000. I'm not inventing anything, I'm copying:
Iron, Copper, Salt, very few electronic elements, 18 watts and voila!
65 Watts!
2 x
User avatar
peter
Éconologue good!
Éconologue good!
posts: 363
Registration: 25/10/23, 13:51
x 20

Re: Central implosive electrolysis




by peter » 18/11/23, 19:51

sicetaitsimple wrote:
Ahmed wrote:: Oops: : Oops: : Oops: : Oops: : Oops: ...

Must follow! We're talking about a very simple thing, you inject 18W into it and it produces 65000. I'm not inventing anything, I'm copying:
Iron, Copper, Salt, very few electronic elements, 18 watts and voila!
65 Watts!


Apart from the calculation...duly established by science,
that it takes roughly 65 watts to heat 000 Liter of Water in 1 seconds, to more than 5 degrees, (the calculation does NOT admit...the value 90)
alas, I can't help it if SCIENCE... has made such a calculation formula VALID!
: Mrgreen:

Furthermore, it is NOT INCLUDED, the powerful Return CURRENTS, having melted copper cables with a section of 2,5 mm (...)
then ADD this Power to the 65 Watts...right.

( post recently cited and therefore confirmed on the CURRENT REVERSES of electrolysis,
but also, stipulating (after reading, which I did not quote, since it is up to YOU... to read and study the LINKS... before coming to act the CLOWN... eh!)
...stipulating that an Electron Capture is Exothermic, and an Electron Loss is Endothermic...in short, etc...
and that EACH TIME, the CONNECTIONS and BREAKS of the Water Molecules and various additives,
CAN generate MULTIPLE probabilities of energetic reactions.
)

Well... the less we simplify electrolysis,
PLUS there are various probabilities of WHO IS THE Culprit (to be discovered) producing as much Current and Themic energy,
it's a little more complex when such a CIRCUIT ALLOWS the Elements to react themselves, among themselves, and FREELY...
in a natural way, and WITHOUT FORCING!
0 x
User avatar
peter
Éconologue good!
Éconologue good!
posts: 363
Registration: 25/10/23, 13:51
x 20

Re: Central implosive electrolysis




by peter » 18/11/23, 19:58

If you FORCE Matter,
it's as if you are suffocating it with Energy that it doesn't need.

There's no point in OVERconsuming Watts to make hydrogen...
Just a little “push” is enough to trigger the Swing effect...and the rest will come by itself,
since it is automatically RELOOKED from the start.

Everything was thought out from the start WITH a Loopback!
Far too many researchers make the mistake of adding this one at the end...
while it IS PART of an OSCILLATING circuit. ( swing )
0 x

Back to "Special motors, patents, fuel consumption reduction"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 89 guests