My View on Meyer's WFC, the VIC, Resonance, and the Reaction Water has.

[Retro]

I have to state that you have absolutely no reason to believe that I have any idea what I am talking about or that what I have to say bears any resemblance to reality. Let me also state that I cannot, within the confines of this document, give you an understanding of electronics, which is a major portion of my discourse concerning Meyer’s technology. With that said, let me begin…


After having studied Stanley Meyer’s patents for some years and not having managed to discover a link between Meyer’s claims of high voltage, low current, resonance, and capacitance, I thought either I didn’t have the firm grasp on electronics and physics that I though I had, or, Meyer was a fraud as other’s had been saying. Being open minded as I am, I filed Meyer’s invention away in the back of my mind as one of those mis-understood phenomena of which I never lose hope of someday understanding.


One day, I stumbled upon a link to a forum which discusses Meyer’s technology. One of the discoveries I made that day saddened me greatly. That being the death of Stanley Meyer.

(Continued)

[Retro]

I continued reading through the posts on that site and came across Meyer’s Voltage Intensification Circuit (VIC) in a form that made more sense to me. (VIC PDF Link) Here, I found the lost link to my understanding many of Meyer’s patents concerning the fracturing of water. Yes, Meyer does have patented technology using plasma to break down water to form ammonia and nitrous-oxide as a combustable mixture, but that is not discussed here.


You will notice a difference between the diagram of the VIC in the PDF above, and the diagram of the VIC on the next page. The difference being that I have added polarity markings to the coils depicted in this version to help show what Meyer was doing with this transformer.


Notice the ground applied to TX2 and TX5. This ground is significant to the resonance of the whole circuit. Also notice that TX4 and TX5 are applying the same polarity to each of the electrodes to which they are connected. TX4 and TX5 are wound and perform identically. They also happen to be the windings that supply the high voltage to the cell as a whole. The way that TX4 and TX5 supply this high voltage to the cell is called unipolar (they are both applying the same polarity). They are also the conduit for supplying a bias or differential voltage from TX2 & diode, to the electrodes. So in addition to forming the inductive part of a resonant L/C circuit, TX4 and TX5 also serve as an extension cord connecting TX2 to the electrodes.


Notice that TX2 is in serial with TX4. In this configuration, TX2 augments the voltage supplied by TX4 during the positive AC cycle when the diode will be forward biased and able to conduct, thus providing a complete circuit for current to flow.


Let’s say that TX4 and TX5 create a positive 2,000 volts each, and TX2 creates a positive 300 volts when the VIC transformer is on the positive half of it’s resonant cycle. The actual voltages applied to the electrodes would (in reference to the ground) be +2,000 volts to B-, and +2,300 volts to B+. Notice that this scenario doesn’t take into account any losses due to the resistance of the wire used in any of the coils.

2338



After having given the reader a chance to look at the VIC circuit (above), let me state for clarity that TX4 and TX5 are wound identically. Being identical, we could reconfigure the circuit and do away with one of the windings. Doing away with one of the windings will reduce the total circuit resistance involved in biasing the electrodes. If you really want that resistance or find you need it, it is much cheaper to use a resistor than to use 304 stainless steel wire as Meyer has suggested. I see no magic to be gained from using exotic metals/alloys in transformer windings just to gain resistance. It’s an added expense that most of us can do without.

(Continued)

[Retro]

Now a word about the pulse trains used to drive the VIC and the resulting waveforms in reference to Meyers original diagram. Many may be of the opinion that the rising pulse train represents the resonant frequency. But I have a different opinion. In the illustrations (below), notice the three wave forms. I believe the waveform labeled “Cathode” represents the waveform that exists between ground and the connection of the diode’s cathode to TX4. Connecting an oscilloscope directly to B+ and B- at the very least would change the resonance of the whole circuit.

2339 / 2340 / 2341

I also believe the waveform labeled “B+ and B-“ is the correct representation of the differential that exists on the electrodes (B+ and B-) at any point in time during the pulse train. The waveform in black being the differential that exists on the electrodes, the red being the differential that exists between ground and the junction of the diode to TX4.

(Continued)

[Retro]

Now let me present the actual resonant circuit, devoid of all other circuitry.

2342

In the diagram above, we have TX5 connected to ground on one end, and to the watercell on the other end. This is the resonant portion of the circuit, and this is as simple as it gets. Here, one can change the resonant frequency of the circuit by adding or removing water from the cell, changing the electrode size, or adding or removing windings on TX5. If one were to add a pickup coil to this transformer, one could build a free running oscillator to drive this circuit, (basicly just amplify what the pickup coil provides) and any changes to the resonant frequency of this circuit would change the oscillator frequency as well. Pretty simple. Add windings to TX5 and the resonant frequency drops while the voltage to the cell rises. It’s a ratio of inductance to capacitance, and the balance determines the resonant frequency of the circuit as a whole. This circuit accomplishes the basic task of creating conduction paths in the water, where all available water molecules effectively become entrained in shoulder to shoulder single file bucket brigades for the purpose of passing electrons into and out of the rest of the water in the cell. Each water molecule having only two neighboring water molecules with which it cooperates in passing these electrons, and refusing to cooperate with any other water molecules for similar purposes. Attempts to pass electrons at 90deg to this path will be ingored and refused.

(Continued)

[Retro]

Now, you may find this a bit odd. The modified VIC (without TX4).

2346

Notice TX5 supplies the high voltage pulse to B-, while TX2 supplies the bias voltage pulse across both B- and B+. We get approximately identical results, except for three issues, (1) concerning delaying the bias applied to the electrodes (explained later), (2) concerning the mass of TX2 being added to the cell’s mass, and (3) any stray capacitance involved with TX2, which would reduce the resonant frequency of the circuit. In effect, a whip doesn’t crack if the cracking end is too heavy, and the word “cracking” as used in this analogy is not in reference to cracking water. Any stray capacitance added to this circuit reduces it’s effectiveness.

This brings us to the reason for the pancake windings of TX4 & TX5. That being the capacitance that exists between the windings and the voltage differential present between interactive windings. If one considers the standard way of winding a transformer, there are likely to be 100 windings connecting any two interactive windings which would influence each other via stray capacitance, and the pancake method of winding substantially reduces the number of windings between interactive conductors and thus the voltage levels involved, and thus the leverage this capacitance would have in reducing the resonant frequency of the circuit. (Consider the Tesla Coil here) If one were to compare a standard wound coil with a pancake wound coil, and test the resonant frequencies of these coils without any external connections to the coils, one would find the pancake coils would resonate at a higher frequency. One might feel this is actually more effort than is needed, but Meyer was after efficiency, and being able to entrain more water molecules into forming conduction paths would insure the electrodes were effectively insulated from each other. Who knows, maybe standard methods of winding transformers could be modified to perform just as well if extra insulation were added between the layers. I don’t feel I described this as well as might be needed, but hopefully, I have gotten the point across.

(Continued)

[Retro]

But, what if we could do away with the pancake coils, and allow any stray capacitance to lower the resonant frequency without loosing effectiveness? To do this, we will need to go back to Meyer’s earlier method of using 3 electrodes, but I believe I have found a way to use 3 electrodes and still retain most of the efficiency of the resonant circuit.

2344


Then too, since the effectiveness of this circuit is no longer dependant on the driving coil being mostly devoid of any stray capacitance to be effective, and any stray capacitance in the driven coil not only slows the resonant frequency, but also effectively increases the number of conduction paths created in the water by requiring more current to drive it. Plus, without the diode, the red & blue electrodes no longer remain polarized, and will further slow the resonant frequency by requiring more current to drive the changes in electrode polarity, thus ensuring more conduction paths are needed in order to pass enough current to re-bias the red & blue electrodes. And since the red & blue electrodes no longer remain polarized, they will both return to zero bias twice per cycle, and at that point, are likely to effectively regage the process, allowing any conduction paths which may have formed between the electrodes to disband, freeing those water molecules to form new conduction paths to the green electrode, thus re-establishing full insulation between the red & blue electrodes.

(Continued)

[Retro]

After reviewing the diagram above, it occurred to me that the conduction paths connecting to the green electrode could just as easily be connecting to another electrode pair, and possibly double gas output while only requiring a small amount of extra power to bias this new set of electrodes.

2347

One needs to remember that the part of these electrodes where the water breaks down is between the electrodes, and in order to ensure the most effective operation, one needs to insulate those electrode surfaces which don’t face the accompanying electrode with corona dope, paint, engine enamel, or some similar waterproof coating This ensures that all conduction paths form between each electrode pair where they are needed for the purpose of electrically insulating the electrode pair from each other.

(Continued)

[Retro]

If it is found that further ionization is of benefit for enhancing gas production, one can either add windings to the driving and driven coils, or add a voltage doubler at the ground connection of both coils. Adding windings will lower the resonant frequency, adding the voltage doubler (see following diagram) will create a larger load at startup, but this method of ionization creates a static charge, and once established, will not impede operation further.

2348

Then too, there are many possibilities. Take for instance the following diagram.

2349

In the above diagram, both transformers are driven in series, but the coils driving the electrodes are in parallel. Electrode voltage should balance, and conduction paths should form equally on both electrodes and diverge into the surrounding mass of water. When the voltage rises high enough to form a spark on the spark gap, the voltage on the red electrode should drop substancialy, forming a bias between the plates, causing an electric field large enough to pull the water molecules apart. The spark that discharges the red electrode should also load the top transformer sufficiently enough to force the lower transformer to drive the blue electrode to an even higher voltage and give greater feedback as well.

(Continued)

[Retro]

Other applicable information I have acquired.

I read on the internet that the Russians have found a way to reduce the friction encountered by their sea going vessels and torpedoes as they move through the water. At 1st glance, one might think this would be worlds away from Meyer’s technology, but, in reality, this anomaly which the Russians discovered is the very thing which allows Meyers methods to work.


Explanation:

The Russians found that when electric current is applied to water, the water molecules form conduction paths or strings where the molecules bind together to conduct electrons. The Russians put a charged electrode out in front of the vessel, (the vessel being the 2nd electrode) and the water molecules will bind together to form conduction paths in the form of individual strings which are one molecule wide, but many molecules long. As the vessel moves, the strings of molecules slough off the electrodes, but stay bound together for a time, and while the water molecules stay entrained in these strings, they create less friction as the vessel moves through them.


Herein lies the magic of Meyers technology. As TX4 & TX5 charge the electrodes with the same polarity, the water molecules become entrained as they conduct electrons into or out of the container of water. While these water molecules remain entrained, they will not easily break loose to form new conduction paths, thus, the electrode pair become insulated from each other while they continue to be the focal point of conducting the electrons into and out of the mass of water in the cell. It’s at this point that one can apply a high voltage differential across the electrodes without any measurable conduction between the electrodes. And, it’s at this point that the voltage can be raised to levels that will break the water molecules apart.


A friend recently brought new DARPA technology to my attention. This technology is (as I understand it) called water-wires. Two electrodes are placed in water, a laser beam is passed through the water from one electrode to the other, and while the beam is in place, a bias is applied to the electrodes. Conduction paths immediately form between the electrodes within the laser beam. Little electrical leakage takes place since both electrodes are completely covered by the conduction paths, and the conduction paths themselves have no leakage. So the water wires are essentially self insulating since the entrained water molecules only pass the electric current within the conduction path. Having one’s theory backed up by further developments and findings is nice.


More info:

While the cell as a whole is being driven to a highly charged state, the electrodes do indeed form a capacitor which serves a purpose, but that purpose has nothing to do with the resonance of which Meyer speaks.


Also, the gaps in pulsing the VIC are for the purpose of regaging. During these gaps where the VIC is not being pulsed, the water molecules will become free to form new conduction paths which will discharge the voltage differential that exists between the electrodes. And, after the electrodes have been discharged, the water molecules are again free to become entrained in the type conduction paths which will insulate the electrodes from each other.


Further reason for the regaging is that when a water molecule has been broken, the conduction path in which it was entrained is also broken, thus all water molecules that were part of that conduction path are free to form new conduction paths, most of which are likely to create conduction paths which will connect the electrodes to each other, thus the electrodes are no longer insulated from each other.


The reason for TX4 & TX5 being identical windings is to provide a path for conducting the bias voltage to the electrodes. I believe the reason TX4 & TX5 are bifilar wound is to provide an analog delay line, which will postpone the application of the bias voltage to the electrodes long enough for the water to form those conduction paths which are required to insulate the electrodes from each other.

(Continued)

[Retro]

Below is a diagram where I attempt to clarify that inductors TX4 & TX5 are key parts of the resonant L/C circuit Meyer speaks of, and to further point out what actually serves as the functional capacitor in this same resonant L/C circuit.

2350

I’d also like to point out that all conductive material in the cell makes up it’s total capacitive mass, and that adding more water to the cell will reduce the resonant frequency of the circuit, just as removing water from the cell will increase the resonant frequency of the circuit.


If I haven’t made it clear enough, I’d like to state that with TX4 & TX5 being identical in electrical performance, and also being bifilar wound, will effectively function as a single inductor where resonance is concerned, and this inductor relies on it’s connection to ground and it’s connection to the cell for the needed capacitance to make a fully functional L/C resonant circuit.

(Continued)

[Retro]

The next diagram (Below) is a copy of my original diagram of Meyer’s VIC (Modified Sunday, April 15, 2007, 9:09:31 AM ) with TX4 & TX5 modified to clarify that they are bifilar wound, and all coils have been given polarity marks. I further modified this diagram to point out the two parts which make up the capacitor which is active in forming the resonant L/C circuit. The labeling of TX2 has also been changed from “Secondary Coil” to “Electrode Biasing Coil” (Which I find more descriptive).

2351

It may sound odd, but I’m of the opinion that voltage, when applied to a wire 50 miles long, may immediately appear at the other end. Let me explain. We currently have no means of measuring voltage without electron flow, and that electron flow is appropriately called current. We have instruments known as volt meters, which measure current, that current representing the voltage required to create said current. We have resistors which limit current flow based on the voltage pushing the current, but no real way of verifying actual voltage drop, just current drop. I say all this after seeing the circuitry involved in an experiment where +15,000 volts was momentarily (fraction of a second) applied to an electrode in a container of water via a large choke, and the water immediately broke down into hydrogen & oxygen, then ignited, reforming water, and very little power was expended during the entire process. My conclusion is that electrons were not the operative force in this experiment, leaving voltage as having caused the reaction, and that reaction took place before electron flow could accelerate and have any significant impact. It does make sense that electrons were yanked off the water molecules, allowing the hydrogen & oxygen to break free and form a gas pocket in the water, but massive electron flow didn’t take place, partly because of the brevity of the application of power, but also because of the choke. Electron flow appears to have some form of inertia, and that inertia seems to have some connection with the creation of a magnetic field. To me, it appears voltage affects all electrons in a conductor immediately upon application, but the electrons have to follow some sequential set of rules in order to move or flow.


Also, it appears an inductor or electromagnet can create a much greater magnetic field than it can sustain without damage. For instance, an electromagnet rated for continuous use at 10 volts might be driven for a fraction of a second at 1000 volts without even getting warm, but produce a massive magnetic field while powered, and use only a fraction of a watt in the duration of the process. Case in point, Edwin Gray’s motor.


It may appear I’ve been chasing rabbits, so let me get back to the point, that IF voltage, when applied to a length of wire, immediately appears at the other end, the Meyer’s bifilar winding has 4 purposes.
1) An efficient method of ionizing water molecules based on a resonant L/C circuit.
2) A method of applying a bias voltage to the electrodes of the watercell.
3) A method of delaying electron flow to the electrodes of the watercell.
4) A method of entraining water molecules so the electrodes become insulated from each other.

(Continued)

[Retro]

A similar technology developed by Bob Boyce appears to me to use 3 of the afore mentioned methods. (1, 2, and 4)


The story of how Bob discovered his technology, (as I remember) had to do with Bob’s racing boats, and finding a performance boost by using HHO from an on-board electrolyzer. As the story goes, his alternator suffered a malfunction where a rectifier shorted, and when he hit a certain RPM, his electrolyzer would produce HHO well beyond expectation or design. I don’t recall that Bob ever revealed which rectifier shorted, be it on the positive or negative rail, so one is left to wonder. Bob also never revealed the actual waveform this malfunctioning alternator applied to his electrolyzer. Apparently, Bob put a lot of effort into reproducing the effect, and while he claims to have succeeded in discovering the correct waveform to reproduce the effect, he may have complicated the issue.


One can figure out the basic waveform Bob’s alternator should have produced having one rectifier shorted, supposing all other rectifiers remained operational. What would be lacking would be any harmonics which might have been generated. But, what if the electrical effects applied to Bob’s electrolyzer were similar enough to Stan Meyer’s methods to produce the same results? What if one were to attempt to apply Stan Meyer’s methods to an alternator, and run the alternator at a speed that approached the output frequency needed to stress the water the same way Meyer’s methods accomplished?


Meyer did have one application which used an alternator, and that application used the same method illustrated in some of Meyer’s earlier documentation were he used 3 electrodes, two electrodes closely spaced, and one electrode placed some distance away from the closely spaced pair. The far electrode allowed efficient breakdown of the water (at non-resonant frequencies) by entraining water molecules in conduction paths from the closely spaced electrode pair to the far electrode, then applying a bias voltage to the closely spaced electrode pair when they were insulated from each other, and removing that bias after fractured molecules broke established conduction paths, which released entrained water molecules to form new conduction paths between the closely spaced electrodes. After having removed the bias voltage from the closely spaced electrode pair, the freed water molecules would reform conduction paths to the far electrode, thus regaging the process. So, Meyer’s alternator method worked outside any L/C circuit resonance due to the use of a 3rd electrode, but did require regaging, and any chokes/inductors used in Mayer’s alternator application were not there particularly for resonance, but to mitigate momentary/periodic electron flow that might occur between biased electrodes before regaging events. Meyer was after reducing as much current flow as he could, using any means necessary.


Bob’s focus has always been production, and while the basic effect does increase overall efficiency, Bob’s focus has not been efficiency. I’m not attempting to discount Bob’s achievements, but rather, I am attempting to point out my belief that both Bob and Stan were creating the same sequence of events in water which ultimately results in the breakdown of the water molecule.


It appears to me that if one does not use a 3rd electrode, the only way to entrain enough water molecules to insulate the biased electrode pair is to run at circuit resonance or better, and running a circuit above it’s resonant frequency requires the application of more power, thus the reason Meyer used pancake windings in an effort to reduce stray capacitance in his transformer windings, thus increasing the frequency of his L/C resonant circuit. Also, if it did not occur to the reader, using a 3rd electrode reduces the efficiency of the process due to the fact that current from an external source has to be applied to that 3rd electrode to entrain the water molecules into conduction paths, and this amounts to more power than is required to keep a resonant circuit bouncing along.

(Continued)

[Retro]

Back to Bob’s technology. Below is a diagram that is somewhat along the lines of what Bob described in the malfunction of his alternator. I have assumed the rectifier which shorted was on the ground side, and have also removed the rectifier for that winding from the positive rail as well. The included waveform is what I believe would be applied to the electrodes by this circuit. The waveform in this diagram looks similar to Meyer’s technology in function, and will require the alternator to be run above a certain RPM to achieve the desired effect.

2352


If one removed the full wave bridge rectifier, one would likely see the waveforms shown in the following diagram applied to the electrodes. Just looking at the waveforms in the diagram below, it doesn’t appear to me that this would work well, if at all. I say this because a bias is established across the electrodes before conduction paths can be formed into the rest of the water as needed to insulate the electrodes from each other.

2353

Any method which breaks water down more efficiently is progress. And, any method that accomplishes this feat to any great degree appears to require the sequence of entraining the water molecules in active conduction paths, then applying an electric field across those active conduction paths at a 90deg angle, then regaging in order to re-entrain any water molecules freed from the previously created conduction paths.

Well, one can only connect the dots using what knowledge one has, and I have arrived at these conclusions based on my research and experiments. I have caused two electrodes to become insulated from each other when spaced 3mm apart as part of a resonant L/C circuit. I have also broken down water using one wire in a cup of water insulated from everything else which might conduct any current, only using 60 cycles.(So much for molecular frequency theory)

I’ve been watching and waiting for someone to explain how Meyer’s technology works since 1996. I’ve seen faulty logic used to explain this technology, and most of it was apparent at the time. Pieces were left out. Wishful thinking was plugged in. It looks as if my logic is correct on this, at least to me. Time and results will prove me right or wrong. I’m not looking for recognition, just results.

I didn’t set this documentation up in the fashion of a wiki or mind-map, and so, the ideas presented may not have been as cohesive as they might have been, but I hope you didn’t find reading the info presented here to be too laborous and that you may have come up with some ideas of your own.

[Retro]

Here are two links to the same Meyer patent where the VIC and resonance are described. The control circuitry given in block diagram are more complicated than needed, and IMO, are done this way to confuse those who might try to replicate the technology rather than get the basics of operation understood.

http://www.waterpoweredcar.com/pdf.files/Stanspatentcircuit.pdf

http://stanleymeyermedia.com/new/documentation/Patents/SMeyer-International_Patent-WO9207861A1.pdf

[ZavraD]

It may sound odd, but I’m of the opinion that voltage, when applied to a wire 50 miles long, may immediately appear at the other end. Let me explain. We currently have no means of measuring voltage without electron flow, and that electron flow is appropriately called current.

A very old fashioned foil leaf electroscope (http://www.answers.com/topic/electroscope-2) detects DC voltage with no current flow. A more sensitive detector is this modern one (http://www.amasci.com/emotor/chargdet.html) The Foil Leaf style can be observed much faster than visually with the addition of a Laser diode and a photo cell to detect the slightest movement of the leaves.

The most used description of current flow is; Electrons jump from one atom's valence shell to the next at the speed of light in the conductor. Generally that speed is considered to be C x .95 in copper.

Voltage potential is basically the difference in the density of free electrons between two points in a circuit or between two unconnected Circuits. Since it takes some time for any free electrons to move to the end of a conductor, it also takes some time for the density at the end to increase.

To travel 300,000M takes an electron 1.0526 milliseconds in copper. It will also take that long for the voltage to be detected by the fastest, most sensitive method. Since the wire and earth form a reactive circuit, it will take longer for the full voltage to be detected.

Something to be aware of is that at higher frequencies, ( IDR how high,) the apparent resistance increases due to Skin Effect. At 1 MHz use solid, not stranded wire. At higher than 3 MHz, I would research Skin Effect.

You may also be interested in Normal vibrational frequencies of water molecule (http://www.ukessays.com/essays/chemistry/normal-vibrational-frequencies-of-water-molecule.php)

[Retro]

Thanks for your comment, research, and the links you provided ZavraD!
Good stuff!

I can't agree that the foil leaf electroscope detects DC voltage with no current flow. I can agree that the current flow is minimal, short in duration, and likely the lesser of many voltage detectors, but there is still current flow. Any conductor has a capacitance, so while the foil leaf electroscope does not have a sustained current flow, there is a flow of current or there would be no effect.

Does the influence of an electron's charge extend beyond the general proximity of the electron? And can that influence be detected and/or measured with absolutely no electron movement?

[ZavraD]

Thanks for your comment, research, and the links you provided ZavraD!
Good stuff!

I can't agree that the foil leaf electroscope detects DC voltage with no current flow. I can agree that the current flow is minimal, short in duration, and likely the lesser of many voltage detectors, but there is still current flow. Any conductor has a capacitance, so while the foil leaf electroscope does not have a sustained current flow, there is a flow of current or there would be no effect.



Does the influence of an electron's charge extend beyond the general proximity of the electron? Yes. De jure, to the ends of the Universe; De facto, until it is lost in noise.


And can that influence be detected and/or measured with absolutely no electron movement? Absolutely speaking, No. Practically yes. In the case of the Leaf Electroscope the electrons must move into the leaves before the leaves move apart (- voltage, for + E the electrons move out of)

A crude ASCII schematic of a leaf electroscope

E Source -----------------<

Where ----- is a wire connected to the E Source and < is the two leaves (connected to the wire.)

The Leaf Electroscope uses the fact that two objects with the same charge repel each other.

I believe that using the term Absolute delays understanding because "absolute" involves any distances and times equal to or larger than one Plank, (there are none smaller)


I can't agree that the foil leaf electroscope detects DC voltage with [absolutely] no current flow. I absolutely agree with you and if you had said

I can't agree that the foil leaf electroscope detects DC voltage with effectively no current flow. I would have to effectively disagree with you.

If we were discussing equipment that operated in the X-Band, (Satellite communications et al,) the "Effective" statements would be wrong due to the incredibly short wavelengths involved. Down around the Microwave band, the Effective" statements are starting to becoming more pertinent.

The visuals I have seen of the equipment involved indicate me that the highest frequencies that we amateurs will probably be working with is Microwave. When the HHO Industry matures we may see Cells operating in the nanometer and smaller range. At that time "Absolute" will be a prerequisite for understanding.

I do hope this helps. I greatly appreciate this thread.

[ZavraD]

In reply to post #3 (http://www.hhoforums.com/showthread.php?8489-My-View-on-Meyer-s-WFC-the-VIC-Resonance-and-the-Reaction-Water-has.&p=54496#post54496)


Now a word about the pulse trains used to drive the VIC and the resulting waveforms in reference to Meyers original diagram. Many may be of the opinion that the rising pulse train represents the resonant frequency. But I have a different opinion. In the illustrations (below), notice the three wave forms. I believe the waveform labeled “Cathode” represents the waveform that exists between ground and the connection of the diode’s cathode to TX4. Connecting an oscilloscope directly to B+ and B- at the very least would change the resonance of the whole circuit.



I also believe the waveform labeled “B+ and B-“ is the correct representation of the differential that exists on the electrodes (B+ and B-) at any point in time during the pulse train. The waveform in black being the differential that exists on the electrodes, the red being the differential that exists between ground and the junction of the diode to TX4.

(Continued)
I am glad I am rereading your thread, because this time I can view the attachments. It makes a lot more sense this way.

It is my belief (mostly due to the pulsed square wave input, that the VIC = the Resonant Cavity is a ringing transformer. The Pulse Input wave form http://www.hhoforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2339&d=1407175991 should have a reference voltage of 0vdc across the middle of the waveform. The Cathode Waveform http://www.hhoforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2340&d=1407176178 should (IMO) be flipped left to right, should have its 0vdc reference line at the bottom. and the Anode's waveform would be Identical to the Cathode's except inverted. Note that for all three, the top of the image is the Negative voltage referenced to ground or neutral.

Note also, that the input shows 6 pulses, but the cathode's image only shows 2 of those input pulses. T

TX1, 2, and 3 are primarily tuned to the frequency of the input pulses.

TX 4 and 5 and the "Resonant Cavity" are tuned to the resonant frequency of the Ringing oscillator they form. IMO, the oscillator is triggered by the leading edge of the input pulse. Power is supplied to the oscillator by the Pulsing Core during oscillation, (ringing). Only current required to split H2O molecules actually flows thru the oscillator circuit.

I am sorry, I can see why it works, but I can't articulate how it works just yet. In the US Navy, in the early 70's, this type of circuit was a week long course all by itself. It is a really fascinating piece of work.

IT might help to think of it as several "Black Boxes." I am ignoring TX3 for now.

TX1 and TX 2 and the Diode are one black box (Input Box or IB). In the IB, the diode effectively stops most current flow in one direction. That is because solid state diodes do not absolutely block reverse current. Another BB, the Control Box, (or CB,) consists of TX4 ad 5. The Resonant Cavity (RC) is another BB and last is the Oscillator Box, (OB), which is made up of the CB and the RC.

The totality of the IB consists of TX1 and 2, the diode and the CB. The CB effectively blocks most current flow during the half cycle that the Diode doesn't. Note that neither one absolutely blocks current flow. In fact, within the OB, effectively, current flows just fine.

The IB operates at highest efficiency at the Input Pulse frequency, while the CB does so at a much higher frequency.

IMO, it is a requirement that inside the OC, the CB either stops current flow during half of each cycle or keeps the cathode negative with respect to the anode. Otherwise the 2H and O Ions would be trying to convert to H2.

[Retro]

ZavraD,

I hit "Reply with quote" and I see more in your reply than is displayed while browsing the thread. Interesting...

Thanks for breaking out the possible implications in my statements.
I was implying [Absolute].

I was just thinking, this same issue exists in hydraulics.
A pressure gauge works in a similar fashion to the leaf electroscope.
The pressure of a fluid cannot be measured without at least a small movement of fluid into the gauge.

With pressure we can end up with an elemental phase change. (Gas > Liquid > Solid)
With voltage, we can end up with leakage.

[Retro]

Ahhh...Okay....
One must be logged in to see imbedded images when browsing the thread.

You make some good points concerning the pulse trains.

I'm inclined to believe the pulse input is just a logic level representation.

I should probably go back and re-think the cathode waveform.

Concerning the transformer and resonance, I think Meyer made things more complicated than they needed to be. I think with feedback to an amplifier, and this amplifier driving the transformer and associated circuitry, this could all operate as a free-running oscillator which would automatically run at the resonant frequency. No tuning needed.

I believe the following image is the basis of the resonant circuit.
http://www.hhoforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2342&d=1407176506

I've been contemplating all this for around 18 years, running tests now and again to validate theories. I tend to think in pictures, pictures being worth a thousand words, something usually ends up being lost in translation.

The operation of this device is a vortex of sequences, so black boxing it is a good choice.

I think I'd black-box TX1 & TX3 as a free-running oscillator.(includes amplifier)
TX2 & diode as the electrode bias generator.
TX4 & TX5 could possibly fit into two black-boxes 1) water formatter 2) electrode bias conduit.

TX4 & TX5 are the main influence for the resonant frequency, being the largest inductors and being connected to the two individual masses which in effect make the capacitor, those individual masses being ground and the container of water.

[ZavraD]

I got hold of some more of Meyer's work, (stan-meyer-water-fuel-cell-technical-brief.pdf,) and I think we need to quit using the Term "Resonant Cavity."

The reason is that he used the same theory of language as Humpty Dumpty in Carrol's "Through The Looking Glass," ie 'When I use a word,'[Humpty Meyer] said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less.'

When most people say "Resonant Cavity," we mean an electronic device. When Stan says it, he means a container of hydrogen ions in Brownian-like movement.

The tuned circuits in his contraption do have a resonance and a resonant frequency, which is affected by the physio-electrical characteristics of the cell used in his hydrogen generator, but those circuits have nothing at all to do with his (in)famous "Resonant Cavity."

HHO's definition of Meyer's Resonant Cavity = "Cell," neither more nor less.

He also had a habit of mixing and matching labels, terms, and definitions, such as labeling an inductor as "C", a circuit's resistance as Z, etc. as well as drawing his schematics (sometimes) from right to left.


The operation of this device is a vortex of sequences, I love that :)

Now that I have read some of his own words, I think that I personally would disregard much of what I have previously written in this thread.

[Retro]

I'm inclined to believe Meyer was trying to protect his technology by obfuscation. And using these methods didn't help his reputation on either the technical or moral levels.

The resonance was an efficient way of formatting the water around the electrodes so that no conduction paths formed to carry current from one electrode to the other. And so the conduction paths which did form would isolate the electrodes from each other. Once isolated, a bias could be applied to the electrodes to such a level that the resulting electric field would pull the molecules apart on the positive cycle when valence electrons were scarce. IMO

I have verified that the electrodes are electrically insulated from each other at circuit resonance. I just haven't taken the final step of supplying sufficient bias.

Meyer did progress beyond the WFC.
Meyer ionized air with a hot plasma, mixed the ionized air with water vapor/steam, ran that mixture through a cold plasma, and the end result was ammonia and nitrous-oxide, a combustible mixture. Quick, easy, on demand.

No more arguments about whether resonance was molecular or circuit based, or if electrodes in water make a viable capacitor.

If you positively charge air, the air will then rob the valence electrons from the water molecules and they are then ready to fall apart, and the nitrogen in the air is available for bonding.

Patrick F. McManus coined the phrase "vortex of sequences". I see many circumstances where that phrase is applicable.