To finish with Stanley Meyer ...

[elephant]

I am doing a different post of HHO and improved electrolysis so as not to mix the subjects.

What I want to do here is put a spell on Meyer and experience once and for all (well ... maybe) Meyer's cell. Out of any vehicle, the important thing is not there in the state of things.

The goal is therefore to establish if the rupture of the covalences under THT is of the ball, or if it is founded.

It will therefore be a skeptical replication!

So I asked for prices for 3/4 and 1 inch stainless steel tubes. (I will do a 6 tube experiment, because I fear that a single tube experiment, by decreasing the capacity of the system requires an increase in the frequency. I am convinced that there is somewhere a resonance frequency / RLC which must be found for that it works.

I'm going to make a real 555 double generator

Put really self behind

Really prepare the tubes (not welded) for KOH

Really work in clear or even distilled water

But above all, PUBLISH MEASUREMENTS. What few people have dared to do! Given the good SEO of this site, it will be known

1) I therefore count: measure the current actually absorbed and the volume produced. I would test with several transformers: car coil, microprocessor transformer, car alternator, Tesla type air inductors.
2) I intend of course to draw curves or publish tables
3) using a super voltage divider (I have one dating from my lifter attempts), read the voltages actually reached using an oscillocope.
4) the measurements will be made using an inverted bottle
5) of course, publication on Youtube and on my own website, but contrary to what everyone does, it will be an indigestible thing where we will only see the measuring instruments. At first, I'm not going to ch ** r me to make a beautiful transparent cylinder: it will be a bucket like "Tupperware"

My means being modest for the moment and my limited time, if a reader can lend me a double 555 generator or an electrolysis cell, or inform me a supplier of tubes (someone to idea of ​​the price?), Any help is welcome.

My goal is not to do “cocorico, see how many bubbles I make!” But to establish whether Meyer is true or not. So much the better if I have detractors: we will know how to force them to tell us why their editing works and to prove it to us.

By cons, if it works, it is obvious that Christophe, Maloche, nlc, Lietseu, etc (only known econologist) will be welcome with me, with their own measuring devices.
Other tests will then be considered to try to understand why.
But do not burn the steps.
Your help and suggestions (preferably inexpensive) are welcome
(No need to bring out Faraday's equation, what we are doing here is a skeptical experience!)

[Christophe]

Guidi has been on it since I knew him (2005) he spent tens of hours and hundreds of euros, for example, he wound some selfs himself ... to reproduce the signals of the patents as accurately as possible. ..by obviously varying the different frequencies.

Results: none! Not a hint of a hint of improvement over conventional electrolysis ...

On the other hand guys "who knew" how to do on forums he met tons of them ...

For me the case is closed, definitely!

[elephant]

This is what I feared, (and this is what I may want to make known) but has Guidi published anything? The important thing is to publish!
Do we have his contact details? (possibly in mp)

[tome]

Good evening everyone!

You will find all of Guidi's work on her site here: http://www.pfgtechnologie.be/Energie/Meyer/index.htm

A+
Tom

[elephant]

Thank you very much, it looks very interesting, indeed, I will peel.

What is amazing is that despite my keywords in google, I did not come across it.

SEO is an art (which I practice ...)

[Capt_Maloche]

Hello Eleph

What a good initiative
Imagine that I had in mind some time ago to get started in this TP, so I recovered from the food stainless steel tube, but I never pushed the experiment, as the principle seemed far-fetched to me

however, I have stainless steel tubing at my disposal
diam 48.3 thick 1.6mm
diam 42.4 thick 1.6mm
I would like to make you available

I would be very happy to see your essays on the subject, which I will follow diligently

[elephant]

Thank you, I'll send you an email tomorrow or Monday.

Absurd?

No more than taking a ruby ​​bar, wedging it between 2 mirrors, inflicting the flash of a flash tube on it! When I read that when I was about 13, I would have thought we were in "Blake and Mortimer".

what do we know about water?

Can it be semi conductive? With which dopant? in what proportions? You brutalize the hydrogen electron, stay a proton. What happens in a playground when the pawn is not looking?

I was reading the other day a doctoral thesis on the combustion of heavy fuel oil-water emulsions: incredible what is happening. A real novel!

Enough to feed the thinking of 7 generations of doctoral students, just to nail my beak ...

I can already hear my daughter say to me: "Wow, daddy! You have to stop the drugs! RIGHT NOW!

Having said that, I am one of the skeptics, but I will only have rest when I send pulses of 30-40.000 volts in pure water, at a frequency which will make the whole water plates behave like a capacitor, part of a resonant circuit, electrically and mechanically. (see page 75 of "improved electrolysis")

[tome]

For my part, I've been looking for the why and the how for a long time.

I may have a start to offer you!
For that we are going to take a little tour in the past, at the time of the TSF and of a certain manipulation well known of the former ones of the radio!

Right here:
http://www.carnets-tsf.fr/reformer-les- ... teurs.html


A+
Tom

[dedeleco]

You will never end !!
If like me, scientist, you notice that the followers of Meyer and many others, speak a language mixing scientific knowledge established with rantings without the least proof or experimental overlap proven elsewhere, you conclude from it:
a) either they derail, and their system will never work and prove their strange statements, or b) they discovered a new phenomenon to understand and their inconsistent explanations hide new realities to discover and understand much better !!
In both cases, you are trying to reproduce their secret montage, but the absence of results does not prove the impossibility, but your ignorance of the good conditions of reproduction kept secret for the key points. !!

To read them, it is not a question of conventional electrolysis, but of bizarre nuclear energy type cold fusion, even pump of quantum energy of zero point in nuclear nuclei, which dissociates water, under high voltage alternating high frequency in water !!

Since they start from fundamental physics distorted by Stanley Meyer, he with a pedigree of real effectiveness past, there is interest in to know thoroughly, the areas of established physics which he used to avoid basic errors in reproduction tests, and much more to try to understand what was his approach to find the essential details that are missing !!
If he is not delusional, it is also necessary to seek information from other experimenters of whom he does not speak, but who are essential to build a coherent understanding !!
Also, without an enormous work of reconstruction of the missing elements, there is little chance of making a valid reproduction, if the second case b) is valid, and in the first case a), none of finishing with Stanley Meyer and all the cold fusion, because it will always be possible to affirm that you have understood nothing of the subtleties and that the reproduction has too many errors !!

In my opinion, the constructive scientific method is to start from real, strange experimental facts, to make them reproducible, then to study them in all aspects to make them clear by their properties.
The history of science has clear examples like electricity, then nuclear, which have gone from mystery to clear phenomenon, after thousands of studies of very high quality!

Any new essential phenomenon cannot escape this approach, make it reproducible, then study the properties, then release a theory which describes them, then make this theory coherent with other physical phenomena, in an increasingly powerful synthesis describing a large number of phenomena !!

The first step for high voltage discharges of Stanley Meyer approaches ball lightning a little, a very real phenomenon, not reproducible and to be clarified !!
Ball lightning could have a certain relationship, rarely walking and most of the time never, with the same apparent conditions !!
We will never end with lightning in a ball, because very real with lots of terrifying testimonies, but very irreproducible !!
Personally, I prefer the certainty of reality which imposes the need to make it reproducible and the certainty of ending it one day by making it reproducible!
Ball lightning has been observed in intense discharges of accumulators.
With Stanley Meyer's cold fusion, we are not even sure of the reality !!!

That of Meyer seems less real but more reproducible according to Meyer !!
Finally, the cold fusion, with its multitude of various strange phenomena, often not very reproducible, by various physicists, leaves the impression that some must have a certain reality to deepen.
The difficulty is that very quickly we need large experimental means like mass spectrometer
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectrom%C ... e_de_masse
to find out what produced the discharge experience in water !!
Thus, discharges or arcs in water have been analyzed for the products and some have found new elements not present before, like iron, especially in Russian labs ???
If, to recut at home, we make intense discharges or arcs quite high voltage in the water with carbon electrodes, we smell a sharp smell of scrap, the same as when an old train braked in the station, the nose being the poor man's spectrometer !! ????
Not a proof, but really a starting point, which has still not resulted in labs around the world !!

So to hope to finish, it is necessary to carry out very large research works, sometimes already carried out in the world, but without succeeding with clear certainty !!!

Also you will do little more than me, clues at best, smelling smells !!!
Indeed, even if real, this search is like looking for a needle in a haystack without knowing if the needle is there !!!

[dedeleco]

For Tom,

I may have a start to offer you!
For that we are going to take a little tour in the past, at the time of the TSF and of a certain manipulation well known of the former ones of the radio!

Right here:
http://www.carnets-tsf.fr/reformer-les- ... teurs.html

remake the oxide layer on the surface of the aluminum or tantalum or niobium (thicker with increasing tension) is very classic, understood and studied and as it is fine, it is possible to produce high-value capacitors with a thin thickness of insulator, a few atomic layers.
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condensate ... t%C3%A9%29
and has nothing to do with Stanley Meyer which does not respect the conservation of energy with its high voltage and high frequency electrolysis breaking down water !!