As a consequence of Mookie employing his time and effort in experimenting with electrolysers and magnetism, he has recently afforded me a 'Eureka!' moment.
Though my interpretations of what is occurring differ vastly to that of Mookie's own interpretations, I still have Mookie to thank for demonstrating the effect in the first place, and providing me with a new insight and indeed a new avenue to explore.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKqs5z2DrCk
Though I have stated much of my thoughts on the Dissociation of the Water Molecule thread, I want to reiterate my thoughts here before I go into detailing my planning, designing and indeed fabricating of a new cell based on what I... think I know.
Firstly, I believe the phenomenon we are witnessing is due to cavitation, and this is what I think is happening in Mookie's set up.
He has stainless steel electrodes in a glass jar of water doped with a small amount of KOH. This simple electrolyser is powered by a stabilised dc PSU from a PC, and is using the 12volt terminals. Close to the glass jar electrolyser he has a powerful industrial electromagnet.
When he attaches the 12v PSU, normal electrolysis takes place. When he also powers up the electromagnet, the magnetic field produced by the dc current flowing through the electrolyser interacts with the powerful magnetic field of the electromagnet. The electromagnet, being mains powered is hence running at 50 – 60Hz albeit via a variac. This 50 – 60Hz mains frequency causes the electrodes to oscillate at this given frequency, applying more voltage simply increases the amplitude of the oscillations. Below a certain amplitude, little or no cavitation is in evidence, but up the voltage and the effect eventually displays itself.
One minor area of contention is that Mookie says it won't work with stainless steel electrodes that are NOT magnetic. Well, obviously magnetic electrodes will be influenced into vibrating far easier – or greater - than non-magnetic electrodes, but I personally doubt that this is a critical factor. If this were a critical factor, then cavitation and hence evolving gases would surely be evident when the electromagnet was powered up near the electrolyser, even without the electrolyser itself being powered. This does not seem to be the case. Now, there is some visual motion of the water that suggests that the plates might indeed be oscillating via the electromagnet and without the electrolyser being powered, but not to such a degree that initiates cavitation. However, as yet it is unclear as to whether or not the glass jar is in physical contact with the electromagnet, and if this is the case then this observation could be simply a result of the electromagnet itself physically vibrating and nothing to do with its magnetic field.
The magnetic field of the electromagnet is proportional to the current flowing through it, which itself is proportional to the applied voltage, so reducing the voltage on the variac correspondingly reduces the current and hence the magnetic field.
There is quite a lot to explore here before designs can be optimised. We first need to know if certain frequencies are more efficient than others in this process and what works best. What would happen if the electrolyser voltage was also pulsing? AC might not produce normal electrolysis, but would cavitation efficiency rise or reduce... would AC work at all?
If Fleming's right hand rule is a key factor, how do we go about designing an electrolyser that best exploits this rule?
I sense some fun and interesting times lie ahead.
Edit: I keep referring to Fleming's right hand rule, but actually Fleming's left hand rule may be more applicable here. The right hand rule is known as the generator rule whereas the left hand rule is known as the motor rule. Either way I feel Fleming's rules may play an important role here.
I watched the video and found it quite interesting.
My interpretation of the vibrating plates is that this results mainly from the magnetic attraction and repulsion between the plates and the oscillating magnetic field produced by the E-core transformer. That is why Mookie mentions that the effect disappears with non-ferrous plates. It's a simple and basic interaction. Mookie did not mention any numbers so it is difficult to say how much 12V current he is using, unless I missed that. Nonetheless, that is a static field, and it's effect would mainly be to make the vibration lop-sided rather than symmetrical. The jar is being slammed against the transformer and hence the loud clanking noise. As the electrodes are secured to the jar, the jar will move in concert with the electrodes. All pretty standard stuff.
However, the interesting part is how, with the addition of this vibration in the plate electrodes, the LPM rate seems to increase quite a bit. This is great and interesting research, however no one as far as I've read has asked the hard question yet: How much power is going into that transformer electromagnet?
Obviously no advantage will have been obtained if one can achieve the same LPM rate simply by applying that extra power to the cell electrodes directly.
If it ends up that there is no real advantage going this route, it still makes for interesting research, and may open up some new avenues to pursue in the never-ending goal to break Faraday's law.
.99
Poynt
The mookie has been at this for some time now,Its not his first summer!
Hundreds of hours breathing the HHO
Heres why we need to proceed
Mookie Quote: [from here http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/5590-basic-electrolysis-6.html#post94116]
As far as output I need to be cautious in what I say. This "accellerator" is based on Felix Ehrenhaft's work in the 1930's. His experiments, and those who briefly followed up on it demonstrated a tenfold to 15x increase in the electrolysis rate. I have no way to properly measure that, but can confirm from my own experiments that the increase has to be at least ten times.The effect, as I said earlier, is obvious, dramatic and ferocious.
I assure you, firsthand, that the work that those that are doing this in a much more advanced way than what I have described here
will never see the light of day.
----------------------------------
Farrah
You go Girl!!
Chet
Hi All,
A read of this may enlighten you on the effect,
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Non-Ferrous-Magnet.pdf
Having worked with DC and AC electromagnet control systems (8 mega watt supply transformer) this effect seemed too familiar.
The plates are attracted to the magnet in the video. This will stir the contents with vigour and may be beneficial in removeing the gas produced from the plates but I fear heating from the eddy currents will eventually boil the solution
Steve.
Quote from: ramset on 2010.11.02, 01:15:54
Poynt
The mookie has been at this for some time now,Its not his first summer!
Hundreds of hours breathing the HHO
Heres why we need to proceed
Mookie Quote: [from here http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/5590-basic-electrolysis-6.html#post94116]
As far as output I need to be cautious in what I say. This "accellerator" is based on Felix Ehrenhaft's work in the 1930's. His experiments, and those who briefly followed up on it demonstrated a tenfold to 15x increase in the electrolysis rate. I have no way to properly measure that, but can confirm from my own experiments that the increase has to be at least ten times.The effect, as I said earlier, is obvious, dramatic and ferocious.
I assure you, firsthand, that the work that those that are doing this in a much more advanced way than what I have described here
will never see the light of day.
----------------------------------
Farrah
You go Girl!!
Chet
Hi Chet.
What matters is the question I posed. That is the first one that should have been asked, and the first the author/inventor should have confirmed. It's extremely easy to do. He already has an AC voltage meter on his box. What he needs to do now is to put that variac output through an ammeter. Done. ;)
.99
Quote from: poynt99 on 2010.11.02, 00:44:35
I watched the video and found it quite interesting.
My interpretation of the vibrating plates is that this results mainly from the magnetic attraction and repulsion between the plates and the oscillating magnetic field produced by the E-core transformer. That is why Mookie mentions that the effect disappears with non-ferrous plates. It's a simple and basic interaction. Mookie did not mention any numbers so it is difficult to say how much 12V current he is using, unless I missed that. Nonetheless, that is a static field, and it's effect would mainly be to make the vibration lop-sided rather than symmetrical. The jar is being slammed against the transformer and hence the loud clanking noise. As the electrodes are secured to the jar, the jar will move in concert with the electrodes. All pretty standard stuff.
However, the interesting part is how, with the addition of this vibration in the plate electrodes, the LPM rate seems to increase quite a bit. This is great and interesting research, however no one as far as I've read has asked the hard question yet: How much power is going into that transformer electromagnet?
Obviously no advantage will have been obtained if one can achieve the same LPM rate simply by applying that extra power to the cell electrodes directly.
If it ends up that there is no real advantage going this route, it still makes for interesting research, and may open up some new avenues to pursue in the never-ending goal to break Faraday's law.
.99
It seems like Mookie is about to disappear for a time, which is a shame, but I'm not overly concerned as I have all I need to know in order to follow this up with some conclusive experimentation.
.99, I too feel it is important to know whether or not the electrolyser oscillates if it is not in direct contact with the EM, at least this way we could eliminate direct physical vibrations from the EM. This would also determine if the ss electrodes were in fact at least partially magnetic or not, in that they should still oscillate if they are. However, it doesn't look like Mookie will be forthcoming with an answer to this question, and no one on EF thought to ask this.
Water is not magnetic. Ions within the water are not magnetic. Unlike an E-field which will align the dipolar water molecule, a magnet will have little or no effect on the water molecule. Only when ions within the water are set into motion (a current flows) will an external magnetic field have an effect.
For myself, the matter of how much power the EM is consuming (and I expect probably at least 600W) is irrelevant at present, as Mookies set up would be nowhere near ideal. To me the fact that he appears to clearly be demonstrating a cavitation effect at 50 – 60Hz is the important thing. However, one thing that really does need to be determined is that the bubbles created by the EM are in fact hydrogen and oxygen, and not just water vapour.
A few other things also come to mind when I think of people using mains powered electrolysers in the past, that have claimed over-Faraday and say that they have witnessed bubbles emanating from between the electrodes rather than from the surface of them. Could this have been due to the plates oscillating at 50 – 60Hz and so creating a cavitation effect? Mookies demonstration might just have answered a lot of questions.
I know Mookie says his electrodes need to be magnetic, but as already stated, I would be very surprised if this is so. If this was the case, then the EM alone should have produced some cavitation – it does not appear to. No, I'm inclined to stick with Fleming's rules here, and the fact that a current carrying conductor (the electrodes) will react (move) when their magnetic fields interacts with the powerful external magnetic field of the EM – and in this case at 50 – 60Hz.
As far as Faraday's laws are concerned, this measure of gas would only apply to the standard dc electrolysis occurring, NOT any gases produced via cavitation. Remember, while Faraday's laws can be used as a baseline for comparing other forms of water dissociation, Faraday's laws only apply to the process whereby ions are involved in exchanging charges at the electrodes. This is something that many people fail hopelessly to get to grips with. Faraday's laws of electrolysis themselves are flawless in their simplicity and beyond question if people would only take the time to look them up and fully understand them. Over-Faraday may be quite possible, but this will never make Faraday's laws redundant or obsolete as they only relate to a specific process. Whether cavitation can be made more efficient than Faraday electrolysis in terms of power vs gas output, is unknown to me, but it must be understood that you can not apply Faraday's laws of electrolysis directly to cavitation – or plasma electrolysis for that matter - as both methods evolve gases that are not derived from ionisation of the water molecule. You can however use Faraday's laws as a baseline from which to judge the performance or efficiency of other methods of dissociating the water molecule.
The most immediate thing to come to my mind when I look at Mookies demonstration (and if I'm right in my thinking that Fleming's rules are in effect) is that the electromagnet could be replaced by strong neos within the cell, and instead of the electrolyser being powered by dc, the current could be pulsed. Basically achieving the same effect by reversing the system. Given a high enough pulsed current, and of course depending on electrolyser design, the electrodes would then see the same oscillation effect. This would do away with the need for an electromagnet altogether and make design far simpler.
The beauty of using powerful neos is that any cavitation effect would be a by-product of Faraday electrolysis. By pulsing the current it may be possible to get the electrodes to oscillate and so induce cavitation with very little extra power consumption. The fluctuating magnetic field produced by the pulsing current, would interact with the magnetic field provided by the neos. We basically create a SLF or mains 'hum' within the cells.
The variables that are most influential in both Mookies present set up and my proposed neo version would be the strength of the magnetic fields and the amount of current flowing through the cell.
How important are these super-low frequencies? Many of us that have played with pulsed electrolysers in the past have employed PWMs that do not operate at anything close to 50 – 60Hz, so would never see this effect. Maybe we've simply been operating at too high frequencies!
Got to say this is the most excited I've been for a good while as there really is something to get my teeth into here – and possibly something that explains a lot of things that have to-date evaded explanation.
NB. Great link Szaxx!
Quote from: Farrah Day on 2010.11.02, 09:10:38
It seems like Mookie is about to disappear for a time, which is a shame
That's typical ::)
Quote
.99, I too feel it is important to know whether or not the electrolyser oscillates if it is not in direct contact with the EM,
Actually I wasn't referring to that. What I was trying to say is that the plates oscillate because they are ferromagnetic, and since they are secured to the jar, and the unsecured jar is placed right up next to the EM (to maximise the effect), the jar bangs against the EM.
If the jar was moved 1mm away from the EM and it was secured so as not to move, the electrodes would still vibrate (albeit slightly less) but the jar would not hit up against the EM.
To maximize this effect, one could try nickle electrodes, as I believe they are ferromagnetic. Even better would be a SS electrode made in such a way that it was a flat sealed pocket (except for the top) in which one could insert various ferro materials to try.
.99
99
Quote:
To maximize this effect, one could try nickle electrodes, as I believe they are ferromagnetic. Even better would be a SS electrode made in such a way that it was a flat sealed pocket (except for the top) in which one could insert various ferro materials to try.
-------------------------
Hm....
Seeing as how its the Nickle in the stainless that makes it 400. series.
Good to try.
There will be lots to play with!!
First things first
A valid replication of what Mookie has done ,and then Test/play /improve ......................
Farrah
Will you be listing your components ETC?
I want to replicate your replication!!
Chet
Thanks Farrah Day for starting this thread and thanks RAMSET for pointing to this forum.
As you probably read over at EF I plan on reproducing Mookie's experiment and purchased the same electromagnet he used. My first setup will be to attach steel bars to the 3 legs of the EM about 10" long. Then attach to the steel bars 16 ga 430 ss plates, 3" x 7" in between the 3 bars. The spacing of the 16 ga plates will be in the area of 1/16" to 1/8". Will try to get to 1/16" spacing so as to fit as many plates as possible between the steel bars as possible. All of this will fit inside of a GE house filter housing, 4.5" ID x 10.5" tall. The bars will come in from the bottom of the housing as well as the DC wiring. Will use the 068 PWM to pulse 55 amps at 12 VDC, same as the Freddy Cell setup. Will coat the steel bars with a thin layer of epoxy to protect from the KOH electrolyte.
The GE housing is rated at 120 PSI and will test the cell to 60 PSI. This is also my test bed for the Freddy cell and the Zach West cell designs. That GE water fi;ter housingr is 1/2" thick wall clear acrylic so can see the bubble action as it happens. Will do time tests to fin out how long it takes to get to 60 PSI with pulsed DC vs. pulsed DC + EM. Will test the HHO gas in balloon float test and pop test.
The idea in this design is to move close to 100% of the EM "magnetic circuit" through the 430 ss plates. Mookie had a gap of close to 3/8" of an inch between his plates and the EM face, because of the glass wall thickness. That is a lot of wasted EM magnetic field. So the idea in this test setup is to use more of that magnetic field. Will find out if it works.
Mike R.
Quote from: poynt99 on 2010.11.02, 12:04:56
That's typical ::)
Actually I wasn't referring to that. What I was trying to say is that the plates oscillate because they are ferromagnetic, and since they are secured to the jar, and the unsecured jar is placed right up next to the EM (to maximise the effect), the jar bangs against the EM.
If the jar was moved 1mm away from the EM and it was secured so as not to move, the electrodes would still vibrate (albeit slightly less) but the jar would not hit up against the EM.
To maximize this effect, one could try nickle electrodes, as I believe they are ferromagnetic. Even better would be a SS electrode made in such a way that it was a flat sealed pocket (except for the top) in which one could insert various ferro materials to try.
.99
Yep, either way I'd be happier knowing if this worked with the two units not being in physical contact, confirmation of this one way or another would have been helpful. I don't think that even Mookies martenistic stainless steel (400 series I believe) is particularly magnetic, but it may well be enough to react slightly to the powerful EM. However, I do know that the 400 series is not as corrosion resistant as either the 200 or 300 series, which does not make it ideal for elecrtrolyser plates. As far as I'm aware it is the 200 and 300 series ss containing nickel that is non-magnetic. One thing for sure though, once we have current flowing through the electrodes, the magnetic interaction will be significantly stronger.
My first priority will be to determine whether or not the EM is having any direct effect on evolving gases or whether it is just down to the physical oscillations of the cell created by interacting magnetic fields. We know that electron current through the cell electrodes will produce its own magnetic field and so too the ionic current through the water. The magnetic fields produced by these currents will certainly interact with the EM field, which could well mean the direction of current flow is continually affected, but does this bare any relation to what we are seeing... or is it all down to cavitation?
Hi Mike
From what I can tell you will be looking at this from a completely different angle to myself, as I suspect that our personal interpretations of what is occurring differ greatly. That said, it will be no bad thing to have two completely different experimental set ups on the go. You may have gleaned that - given water is non-magnetic - I'm extremely doubtful as to whether the EM magnetic field is having any direct effect on the water itself. At this stage I'm more inclined to side with Ohmasa, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUPE0Z9V82E in that it is more likely to be a physical effect created by the mechanics of the set up.
Whereas it seems you will be more closely replicating Mookies set up, I'll be designing experiments specifically to support (or not) my own theories of operation.
I'm planning my first experiment as I write. What I intend to do is step by step experiments whereby I will hopefully be able to conclusively nail down the key reactions and interactions.
At least I can speak my mind here and post freely without the worry of having my posts deleted... or my being banned! ;)
Welcome vrand
If you feel inclined to document your build we can setup a workbench for you to place your build info.
Documenting a build whether successful or not at least allows others to follow on or add to your build.
There are 2 options for a workbench They can be set for public viewing or just OUR members.
Peter
Quote from: Peterae on 2010.11.02, 15:01:28
There are 2 options for a workbench They can be set for public viewing or just OUR members.
Peter
Must say I didn't realise this, I thought only members could view workbenches! Where and how is this option accessed?
Yes Farrah/Poynt
It would be better for me to post links that don't require "LOGIN"
Please??
Makes me itchy!!
Chet
PS
@vrand
Thank you so much for sharing your skills,knowledge, and hardwork!!
This is a real "Thriller"!!
PPS
Mookies work is based on this mans work, a post from
Torana
»QuoteAnyone reseaching Felix Ehrenhaft....
1845 Luigi Palmieri used his "palmieri circle" to split water using the Earths magnetic field.
Details of his experimental set up have obviously been shelved.
Theres a paper written about him,"The scientific life of Luigi Palmieri" by L Casertano , 1999,Vol 42 No 3. I tried the URL ,wasnt happening for me.
The book " Electricity" by Robert Ferguson ,1867 makes interesting reading if you can keep up with the Victorian language and conventional current. Takes your thinking pattern back 140 years, before the rules stepped in.
http://books.google.co.nz/books?id=RukDAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=electrici
**you HAVE TO type in page number 200 to find the section on "Electricity induced by the magnetism of the earth" and Palmieri.
Both Faraday and Palmieri were alive at the time and these theories were accepted. This is before AC took off and all other options dumped, the 1882 edition is suited to AC,its a different book .
Palmieri predicted weather changes from measuring electrical disturbance similar to Subblefield,
His pioneer work lays foundation for alot of 'free energy' research using air core coils.
wiki has a bit of info but not much
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_electricity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luigi_Palmieri
Quote from: Farrah Day on 2010.11.02, 15:24:08
Must say I didn't realise this, I thought only members could view workbenches! Where and how is this option accessed?
OK Farrah, your bench has been opened for public (i.e. non-member) viewing.
.99
Ok, cheers .99. Thought it might just draw in a few more minds and/or interested parties.
Quote from: Peterae on 2010.11.02, 15:01:28
Welcome vrand
If you feel inclined to document your build we can setup a workbench for you to place your build info.
Documenting a build whether successful or not at least allows others to follow on or add to your build.
There are 2 options for a workbench They can be set for public viewing or just OUR members.
Peter
Hi Peter,
Thanks for the info. As the parts start arriving and I start building I will take photos of the assembly process. I will let you know when I have enough photos and experimental data so it can be stored on this forum workbench so others can see this experiment.
Thanks,
Mike R.
More on Felix Ehrenhaft [Mookies inspiration] from Torana at OU [today]
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=66598
Chet
Sorry Can't help myself [need a tranquilizer]
1st posted replication attempt
From I_FLEW_MY_OWN at OU
Re: The downfalls of conventional electrolysis - and how to fix them
« Reply #431 on: Today at 09:31:30 PM »
I_Flew_my_Own Quote
@Ramset,
This ought to tickle you. I just had a few minutes in the shop to try Mookies idea. I had thought that his method of adding magnetism to the water was very inefficient and indeed maybe it was not the magnetism at all but only the 60hz vibration created by his plates shaking. I dug out an old 3/4 hp. motor core and set it on the bench. Next I found a plastic container that would just push into the hole where the armature used to fit. Of course there was not one piece of stainless in the shop that was attracted to a magnet. Since another theory running through my mind was that eddy currents were shaking the plates I decided to press on anyway. My plates were 316 .032 x 2" by 3.5". I have some polyethylene tube sleeve which is an open diamond weave flexible mesh used to protect expensive machine tools or the threads on the ends of tubing. I used a piece of the mesh to space the plates about 1/16" apart. Just one plate then the mesh then the last plate wedged in the center of the plastic container which was sitting in the center of the motor core. I used 6 volts from a battery charger to the plates. Filtered water and small amount of sodium hydroxide. I used a variac to power the motor core. With the variac at 50 volts a piece of alum or steel held in the core would vibrate at 60 hz. With the plates energized I slowly turn up the variac to full 120 vac. Only the tiny stream of bubbles that you would expect came to the surface. There was no difference with the magnetism or not. Which is what Mookie said would happen.
Then I stuck a 1"x1"x3" ceramic magnet in the container and the magnet promptly stuck to the motor core. This time there was a difference with the variac on full but not as pronounced as in the video. Next I pulled out the magnet and the plates. Then I stuck a magnet onto each plate. Magnet,plate,mesh,plate,magnet like a sandwich. Back into the water to retest.
This was the real deal. With partial power the water boiled throughout its volume with millions of tiny bubbles. The surface was instantly covered with a mass of foam. No! I did not attempt to light it. I will later outside with a long flaming stick. The proverbial ten foot pole. My opinion at this early date is that it is just vibration. It is well worth pursuing and I will tomorrow.
Garry
Please view attached a drawing.
I can't access attachments on EF, so can anyone tell me if this is a true depiction of Mookies EM/electrolyser arrangement... or should the E-core EM depictions be swapped around? Thanks.
Farrah
Where is this link[attachment]??
post # Or??
Looked thru every Mookie post, No attachments except one that doesn't work[6761]
Its a photo he posted in his next post
Chet
Quote from: Farrah Day on 2010.11.02, 23:26:05
Please view attached a drawing.
I can't access attachments on EF, so can anyone tell me if this is a true depiction of Mookies EM/electrolyser arrangement... or should the E-core EM depictions be swapped around? Thanks.
Thats it Farrah, your drawing is good. The outside poles are the same while the inside pole is opposite to the 2 outer legs of the E. The magnetic field makes a "M" shaped field.
A second big question, particularly after reading about the experiment above by iflewmyown:
With the added electrode vibration and obvious increase in cell "activity", has the cell H2 O2 production rate really increased?
Hopefully these tests will be performed before too many conclusions are drawn. ;)
.99
Consider one other point:
With an electrolyte added to the water a type of emulsion may be forming, particularly when mixed with the liberated hydrogen and oxygen atoms. Foam forming on the water's surface would be an indication of "impurities", and is often caused in liquids by any form of agitation. The extra cell "activity" may in fact only be the production of small air bubbles before they reach the surface and become the foam.
QuoteSurfactants break the surface tension, which in turn allows air to more easily mix with water and creates bubbles. Foam is produced as air is churned into water by turbulent flow or wave action.
(http://artsytime.com/img/bizarre-oddities/foam-on-the-ocean/foam-on-the-ocean01.jpg)
Not 100% certain, just an idea.
.99
Quote from: ramset on 2010.11.02, 21:43:10
Sorry Can't help myself [need a tranquilizer]
1st posted replication attempt
From I_FLEW_MY_OWN at OU
...
Keep up the good work ramset! Take a deep breath :)
We are just getting started :)
Mike
vrand
Looks like Poynt has already set you up a work benchfor future use.
i look forward to your pictures ;)
Peter
Thanks Peter, this is all new to me. :)
As I get more to show, will definitely ask "how to" stuff for posting photos etc...
Thanks, Mike
Quote from: ramset on 2010.11.02, 23:58:51
Farrah
Where is this link[attachment]??
post # Or??
Looked thru every Mookie post, No attachments except one that doesn't work[6761]
Its a photo he posted in his next post
Chet
That would be it, I assumed as a non-member it would only be myself and other non-members that could not access it. So no one has seen a diagram from Mookie that specifically shows the actual layout of his set up?
Quote from: poynt99 on 2010.11.03, 02:54:46
A second big question, particularly after reading about the experiment above by iflewmyown:
With the added electrode vibration and obvious increase in cell "activity", has the cell H2 O2 production rate really increased?
Hopefully these tests will be performed before too many conclusions are drawn. ;)
.99
Gotta say .99, this is my biggest concern, and the one thing that's telling me to curb my enthusiasm. That is, what if the vibrations created by the electrodes are simply breaking up the water surface tension and allowing pockets of water vapour to form - no cavitation, no hydrogen or oxygen!
After further thought I think we really need to replicate Mookies experiment and pass the resulting gases through a condenser to be sure.
No problem vrand
To post a picture click the Additional Options link just below the post window, there in black is Attach click the browse button to the right of this, find the file on your computer, click open, if you want more than 1 attachment click the (more attachments) link to the right of the button, then when done click the post button.
Peter
HHHmmmm.................
Mookie Quote:
Yes I have lit the output gas without a lid on the cell and completely blew apart the (plastic) container.
I will never do that again. The "milky looking water "as you describe it, is made up of a huge amount
of oxygen/hydrogen bubbles that are miniscule in size as compared to the bubbles produced with
a cell running in normal conditions...the cell appears to be supersaturated with escaping bubbles,
and as fast as they leave the cell...they cant leave fast enough
--------------------------------------
Yes I know he's making Gas any way in the Cell
Little Pops on top ?Yeah Thats what you get
BLOW UP THE WHOLE JAR?
NOT!!!
The more I read Mookie, The more I here Chris Hunter's Email from Anonymous Mayonaise Jar Man!![What I refer to him as at OU } When I saw the Mayo Jar in the vid I thought "NO WAY"!!
YEAH WAY
Holy Crap!!
Was getting ready to post this
LOOK AT THE TITLE CHRIS HUNTER PUT ON THE EMAIL
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FW: Electrolysis accelerator
InboxX
Alaska StarI know you will post this for everyone to see, so for the person's privacy, I...
Aug 29
Alaska Star to me
show details Aug 29
I know you will post this for everyone to see, so for the person's privacy, I have blanked his name, and his email.
You have been seeking independent validation of various theories that I came up with, and successful replication. The person I have been conversing with will probably see this and shoot me, but he, like me, would rather stay out of the public forums and the stew-pot of feces that is found there.
Like I stated from the beginning, this is, has been, and always will be far simpler than you can imagine. You have always the option of making it super complicated.
Now I was asked a question regarding his build and his design with a stumbling block, and I answered his problem, which has relevance to what you are working on, for that is the only reason I am sharing it with you. Keep in mind that my non-participation in the forum and his non-participation in the forum is not something that says that I am hiding anything. This guy has the brains enough to figure it out, for all it's simplicity, and use it.
How hard can it be?
So, I am sharing this with you in confidence that it would not be twisted around, but the knowledge gained and applied, proven, can be used to teach others, so that they my indeed understand such simple concepts.
Chris
From: ***************@****************.com
To: alaskastar2000@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Electrolysis accelerator
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2010 11:42:08 -0400
Hi again Chris,
Hope your project has moved a few more steps forward since last time. Stay with it.
Since your reply, I took your suggestions and was able solve my electrical issue. It enabled me to be able to finally test
for much longer periods of time. That allowed me to take things even further. Thanks Chris ..you got me out of a rut.
Those stator magnets were very strong, and the effect dramatic as I said before, but it led me to conclude
that I needed something with an even greater magnetic capability.
Since then, I was able to pick up a powerhouse industrial electromagnet, that at 12 volts has a lifting strength of 889 lbs ( nearly half a ton ! )
and is designed to operate at either 12DC, 24 DC or 120 AC, with lukewarm heat at best at full power. With a variac I'm able to run it
anywhere from 10 AC to 140 AC without a problem. Weighs a whopping 7 lbs. Cost me $60 and has a magnetic field that extends nicely.
At 12 volts DC it sticks to metal like its welded, and a simple PWM takes care of the regulation.
If you're looking for one or two for any reason, let me know ..I have a great supplier.
The accelerating effect on electrolysis is monstrous using this magnet. I'm purposefully using mason jars for testing, so that I can
visually see what's going on, but the pull is so strong that I'm continually breaking jars. I should be able to overcome that pretty simply
with a different plate assembly configuration.
Thanks again Chris. When I'm done I'll upgrade my internet service so that I can send you a video clip (for your eyes only).
..............................
Incidentally..While doing some lurking I see that you are being invited to join a discussion forum. For your sake, I hope you don't take the bait.
It will only lead you to frustration and argument and a huge waste of your time dealing with people who's only goal is to be King of the Castle.
Just by reading what's in those forums, you can see that there's nothing new to learn from people who are still just talking in the same circles.
You've been there before and have been around long enough to know that most people only want something for nothing.
Take the bait..and you'll lose another year.
----- Original Message -----
From: Alaska Star
To: *****************@*************.com
Sent: Friday, July 23, 2010 12:50 PM
Subject: RE: Electrolysis accelerator..any thoughts?
Hey! Yes I have my voice back, and I have been quite busy. Building an electric car from scratch by designing the motor, the battery management, speed controller, etc all from scratch.
Ok, to keep the stator coils from frying up, you need to observe Kirschoff's Law and the Laws of Thermodynamics. These are so important that you will soon learn the most valuable lesson in circuit design.
I will start with a simple circuit because keeping it simple is important.
We have a power source (can be AC or DC) and we have a Coil. Now this coil is nothing more than a length of wire, and this length of wire can be 1 inch long or it can be 1 mile long, it doesn't matter. What would happen if I put a 10 inch length of wire across the terminals of a car battery? Gets quite hot quite quickly! Now, let's put a heat device in series with this wire, like a light bulb.
So we insert a light bulb which is 90% heat and 10% light in series with your coil. Now the coil becomes passive and is a conductor and an inductor, and we observe the laws of thermodynamics. How? For every hot side there's a cold side. Equal and opposite reaction. So if the cold side of the circuit is desired to be the coils, then we need something to get hot so the coils stay cold. The energy has to go someplace.
Now if we put a large ballast resistor in series with your coil (I prefer the tube type carbon pile ballast resistors because I can run a cooling pipe through it to a radiator to cool it down) then it will allow enough current to flow to generate the magnetic field you need without messing with the frequency. If you use a light bulb, you will be restricted by the amount of current that can flow through the tungsten element. A large resistor is designed to carry current but convert energy to heat in a specific location, which would be wherever you want that heat to be located.
Now if you want to go a step further....put your 2 plates in series with the coil, where the power flows THROUGH the water to get to the coil, and the resistance of the water will keep the coil cold, but it will self regulate from the gaseous resistive barrier that builds on the plates from the hydrogen and oxygen.
I hope this helps, and please if you could, let me know how it works for you, test results, etc.
Chris Hunter
ArcticTek.com
From: *******************@****************.com
To: alaskastar2000@hotmail.com
Subject: Electrolysis accelerator..any thoughts?
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 11:50:14 -0400
Hey Chris
You probably don't remember me 'cause I only send you an email maybe once a year.
The first time was before you got sick...the last time was when you were getting your voice back.
Hopefully that's all behind you now, and you're back in some friggin' zone again.
If you remember, I'm not a member of any forum...just a lurker and a browser once in a while.
I'm stuck on something that maybe you can help me get around the stump. I've run hundreds of tests on this
and is the only area of electrolysis that I'm focused on. ..The effect of magnetism on the electrolysis process.
For the past year I've been playing with accelerating the electrolysis process using a couple of fair sized stator coils
(7.5 amp and 8.4 amp) with great success using straight 120 AC. ( No effect with DC). One has 4 coils and the other has two.
Both very powerful electromagnets. I've run them as conventional electromagnets as well as connecting the windings to have
the same magnetic pole facing in. Simple 2-plate martensitic ss electrodes are just fine as a cell for testing.
The acceleration process is monstrous running this way. You probably already know that a 15 to 20 times increase in the rate
would not be exaggerating. (I'd gladly send you a vid clip but my cable provider has me capped, so I cant do that )
As you probably know, you cant run a stator coil that way for much longer than 10 seconds or the windings will fry
with the conductive load, so I protect the windings with a 7.5 amp variac . The problem with that is the increase in acceleration
is very minimal running this way, and I can only run it at 7.5 amps at around 30 volts AC..
Anything you can think of anything (electrical or otherwise) that can add to this set up try to get around this?
Even if you don't have an answer for that ..any thoughts on a slightly different approach I might try with this?
Hope you're doing well.
------------------------
Some pics from stevie !001
Theres a vid too
Taking forever to down load!
The Vid link you need to register to see it[still loading] http://www.ionizationx.com/index.php/topic,1471.new.html#new
Poynt??
Chet
PS
Stevie says very interesting [He should Know!!]
I flew My Own
Quote:
@all
I won't bore you with all the details leading here. I did not need a ten foot pole, I did not need a pole at all. I could not get the mix to spark, bang, whiz or fizz. Nothing, Nada, Zip. The mix looks like a half empty soda bottle that you have shaken for a minute and is about to bust. I ran experiments half the night and the magnetism is essential. I vibrated water from 0 to 120 hz. and no fizz. The stuff just has no bang. I have got other irons in the fire. The video was impressive so I tried it.
Garry
Quote from: ramset on 2010.11.03, 14:52:44
I flew My Own
Quote:
@all
I won't bore you with all the details leading here. I did not need a ten foot pole, I did not need a pole at all. I could not get the mix to spark, bang, whiz or fizz. Nothing, Nada, Zip. The mix looks like a half empty soda bottle that you have shaken for a minute and is about to bust. I ran experiments half the night and the magnetism is essential. I vibrated water from 0 to 120 hz. and no fizz. The stuff just has no bang. I have got other irons in the fire. The video was impressive so I tried it.
Garry
This adds to my fears. It sounds very much like he is just creating water vapour!
We really need to determine one way or another if this is all that is happening in Mookies set up. If it is then cavitation is not occurring, he is simply lowering the pressure within the water which allows it to form gaseous bubbles. Bubbles and cavitation are not the same. Bubbles produced via cavitation would be a result of fracturing the water molecule into its component elements and is of course what we require... bubbles of water are of no use to us.
If it is the case that the oscillations are simply reducing the surface tension of the water and allowing gaseous
water bubbles to form within the liquid, then this makes the Tokyo Electrolysis of president Ryushin Ohmasa and his claims look even more ridiculous than I gave him credit for!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUPE0Z9V82E
Quote from: Farrah Day on 2010.11.03, 16:29:51
If it is the case that the oscillations are simply reducing the surface tension of the water and allowing gaseous water bubbles to form within the liquid, then this makes the Tokyo Electrolysis of president Ryushin Ohmasa and his claims look even more ridiculous than I gave him credit for!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUPE0Z9V82E
Don't forget Ohmasa is running a motor on whatever bubbles he is producing. Mookie said he got a bang. Very soon we will find out.
Thanks Yaro
Steve quote:
From here http://www.ionizationx.com/index.php/topic,1471.new.html#new
Posts: 2086
Re: Resonant waterfuelcell project by Steve
« Reply #33 on: Today at 18:17:05
»QuoteI can comment on the video, but not too much.
I made a promise to a certain person and i have to ask him permission before to give all details.
The Plates are SS430
Power to the plates: 5v by 1.3amps
AC magnetic field.
Tapwater with a drop of NAOH
Thats what Mookie said and thats what it is..
regards
SteveReport to moderator Logged
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve
Administrator
Hero member
Posts: 2086
Re: Resonant waterfuelcell project by Steve
« Reply #34 on: Today at 18:19:01 »Quote
Quote from: yaro on Today at 16:44:21
Are you pulsing the magnetic field? Are your plates shaking?
Steve answer:
Yes and yes
Quote from: Yaro on 2010.11.03, 17:26:30
Don't forget Ohmasa is running a motor on whatever bubbles he is producing. Mookie said he got a bang. Very soon we will find out.
Ohmasa isn't though is he, he's not running anything directly, he appears to be bottling the gases first, and he does have normal electrolysis going on also - just like Mookie. He may well have a puddle of water at the bottom of the gas bottles. Much of the Ohmasa video makes no sense whatsover. At one point he states that a normal electrolyser produces H2 and O2, but his produces hydroxy! What does he think hydroxy is? I feel he's out of his depth. As always the crucial details are left out. If his agitator is producing more hydroxy, how much more? How did he measure it? How does he know it's not water vapour? At the end of the day he lights a hydroxy torch - big deal we can all do that. Not scientific enough - simply too much nonsense and too many unanswered questions for me to take him seriously.
Mookie obviously gets a bang of some kind as he does have standard electrolysis going on there too.
Steve pulled the trigger , eerr Lit the gas
A new movie here http://www.ionizationx.com/index.php/topic,1471.new.html#new
I did some cross reading over most forums and some suggested that the gas of this system is not H, but just an air bubble.
Well....IT IS HYDROGEN GAS.
My ear is def on the leftside now....
Wanna convince yourselfs?
Watch my last video of this day. I am tired and i certainly need a Glenfiddisch..
Steve
Be careful here Chet, you're getting carried away again. Calm down and take a chill pill.
QuoteI did some cross reading over most forums and some suggested that the gas of this system is not H, but just an air bubble.
The problem here is that there is always some hydrogen produced by standard electrolysis occurring - the bang can simply be from that!
Chet, another problem for me is that some of the very dumbest people I've ever come across on forums (outlawstc, hydrocars (Spewing - Brian), etc) all went to IonizationX. And while I'm rating Stevie a good few notches above those mindless idiots you have to take everything into consideration. A vacuum of knowledge will quickly be filled with all manner of wild conjecture, ill-considered posts and utter drivell.
I think it is probably time to stop dragging other peoples posts from everywhere in the known universe over to here and try a little original thought, because things are now starting to get blurred and confusing. Soon we won't be able to see the wood for the trees!
Unfortunately Chet it's not an ideal world and there exists within it all manner of people, some of which are unsavoury characters at best, others are plainly out and out mindless idiots. If you can't or won't accept this, then that is your prerogative. Speaking my mind may be why I am banned from so many forums, but if one of my fellow men or women is, to my mind, posting thoughtless trash and continually spouting utter garbage, then I will continue to air my views. If one of my fellow men or women is clearly using their status or intellect to misinform those uneducated in the discipline or pull the wool over the eyes of the gullible, then I will also make my thoughts known. If people are offended by what I say, then so be it... sometimes you simply have to call a spade a spade! Being nice to idiots will not enhance their intelligence in anyway, but may well serve to encourage them to post further nonsense. Idiots, charlatans, quacks and scam artists are the bane of these forums and I have no qualms at all in 'outing' them as I see fit. You should well know by now that I'm all about the science and, unlike yourself, making it onto peoples Christmas card lists is of no importance to me.
I'll be letting this thread run its course and leave it open, but will be starting other threads that will be more focussed and exercising my moderation rights on them.
Didn't see this till a few minutes ago!!
-------------------------------
Mookie you are an amazing human being
Chris Hunter thank you too.
And stevie 1001[from here http://www.ionizationx.com/index.php/topic,1471.new.html#new
well what can we say!!!
Mookie
quote:
This is my last post to the forum.[Energetic]
Last month I was offered a reasonable amount of money for the intellectual property rights to
a different version of this accelerator by an American research institute after demonstrating it to them.
No one knows me well enough to know what a relief it was for me to turn them down and remain a free man.
That is why I chose to make this earlier version public, here last week.
Have fun with it folks ..there is more to it than meets the eye.
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ...........................
Steve
You are a man of your word. I wish to publicly thank you for keeping this confidential for the past 6 months.
It is for that reason that I have dropped all communication with regards to my work with everyone,
and in future will communicate only with you, and my one trusted colleague and friend
that I told you about some time ago.
You are aware of the wonderful project I am working on. I will remotely stay in touch with you,
with regard to it's progress, as time permits.
My plane leaves tomorrow afternoon.
Mookie
Farrah,
Are you putting together your replication setup? I am waiting for the electromagnet to come in. How far are you?
Quote from: Yaro on 2010.11.04, 15:15:08
Farrah,
Are you putting together your replication setup? I am waiting for the electromagnet to come in. How far are you?
Hi Yaro
I'm going to be building an EM from scratch, still just getting together the parts and deciding on my design at present. I'll start a new thread focussing on the build and my experiments in due course, which I'll be keeping clean by moderating. Hopefully Mike will also get himself a workbench here so we can compare notes. Looking forward to determining exactly what is happening in this process.
Edit: I see Mike (Vrand) has got a workbench set up here ready to go.
Quote from: Farrah Day on 2010.11.04, 16:26:17
Hi Yaro
I'm going to be building an EM from scratch, still just getting together the parts and deciding on my design at present. I'll start a new thread focussing on the build and my experiments in due course, which I'll be keeping clean by moderating. Hopefully Mike will also get himself a workbench here so we can compare notes. Looking forward to determining exactly what is happening in this process.
Edit: I see Mike (Vrand) has got a workbench set up here ready to go.
Hi Farrah,
Yes, I will start posting on my workbench as the parts arrive and I get some bench time building it.
Parts on order:
- The EM from Mookies recommended supplier "Controlled Automation" (Electromagnet that lifts 1430 pounds @24VDC) ebay listing: http://cgi.ebay.com/Electromagnet-lifts-1430-pounds-24VDC-83821-/160501203893?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item255e9e03b5 (http://cgi.ebay.com/Electromagnet-lifts-1430-pounds-24VDC-83821-/160501203893?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item255e9e03b5)
- 430 ss, 24" X 24" X 16ga, 430 ss sheet. Looking at making the electrode plates 3" X 7", so can try at least 2 different configurations. Will take to local machine shop for laser cutting. Got off ebay http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=360314291640&viewitem=&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWNX%3AIT (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=360314291640&viewitem=&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWNX%3AIT)
- Power supply for the plate electrodes, I already have a 55 amp 12 Volt DC PWM http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/PWM-PULSE-WIDTH-MODULATOR-55A-HHO-HYDROGEN-GENERATOR-/300489341412?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item45f68f79e4 (http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/PWM-PULSE-WIDTH-MODULATOR-55A-HHO-HYDROGEN-GENERATOR-/300489341412?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item45f68f79e4). Already using this PS for some other cell designs so it will work perfect for Mookie's design.
- Power supply for the electromagnet can also be done with the 55 amp PWM, as well as the variac. Will test to see the difference between pulsed DC and 60 cycle AC going into the EM.
- Air dryer/pressure regulator is superior to water bubbler for taking out the water vapor of the HHO gas and still leave the "charged gas" to charge the air in the engine combustion chamber. http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/AIR-FILTER-FLOW-REGULATOR-AIR-COMPRESSOR-AIR-TOOL-AFR80-/150489084281?pt=UK_Air_Tools_and_Compressors&hash=item2309d93179 (http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/AIR-FILTER-FLOW-REGULATOR-AIR-COMPRESSOR-AIR-TOOL-AFR80-/150489084281?pt=UK_Air_Tools_and_Compressors&hash=item2309d93179)
- The container at first can be just a bucket, but will need a pressure vessel for the real testing to determine the LPM and to take to 60 psi. Might have to make it out of steel then epoxy coat the inside. Still designing.
Mike
Quote from: vrand on 2010.11.05, 05:36:01
- Air dryer/pressure regulator is superior to water bubbler for taking out the water vapor of the HHO gas and still leave the "charged gas" to charge the air in the engine combustion chamber. http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/AIR-FILTER-FLOW-REGULATOR-AIR-COMPRESSOR-AIR-TOOL-AFR80-/150489084281?pt=UK_Air_Tools_and_Compressors&hash=item2309d93179 (http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/AIR-FILTER-FLOW-REGULATOR-AIR-COMPRESSOR-AIR-TOOL-AFR80-/150489084281?pt=UK_Air_Tools_and_Compressors&hash=item2309d93179)
-Mike
Hi Mike, just wondering what has led you to the conclusion that the resulting gas will be carrying a charge? Is there some reference to this somewhere from a reliable source?
Mike ,
Thanks for sharing your replication ,I know a lot of guys are in this for themselves !
I can see you are not one of them!
I have a question on the Electro magnet?
Mookie said an an AC electro magnet?
I see that Ac and DC mags are made diferently [heat dissapation issues]
Ac clamping and Flipping every cycle DC just clamping.
Perhaps I don't understand ?
Thanks
Chet
Quote from: Farrah Day on 2010.11.05, 09:24:17
Hi Mike, just wondering what has led you to the conclusion that the resulting gas will be carrying a charge? Is there some reference to this somewhere from a reliable source?
Hi Farrah,
A recent gas spectrometer of Brown's Gas found that the gas has a significant plasma "charge", along with water vapor and diatomic hydrogen. Before this paper, Brown's Gas researcher George WIseman discovered this in his 100 series cell BG welder.
"One of the key differences in Browns gas is that some of the
water molecules go into an excited isomer
plasma state; hence
Brown's Gas has more energy density because water molecules
have more energy and are in small clusters called Rydberg
Clusters.
Rydberg Clusters are atoms and (or) molecules that are
weakly bound by the electrons and the electromagnetic force
together in miniature clusters.
Plasmas are partially ionized gas, in which a certain proportion of electrons are free rather than
being bound to an atom or molecule. The ability of the positive
and negative charges to move somewhat independently makes
the
plasma electrically conductive so that it responds strongly to
electromagnetic fields."
Mookie's design incorporates an
electromagnet field, so that is a new feature in the BG industry!
The research paper:
"Plasma Orbital Expansion of the Electrons in Water" http://freeenergynews.com/Directory/BrownsGas/Eckman_-_Plasma_Orbital_Expansion_of_the_Electrons_in_Water.pdf (http://freeenergynews.com/Directory/BrownsGas/Eckman_-_Plasma_Orbital_Expansion_of_the_Electrons_in_Water.pdf)
Mike
Quote from: ramset on 2010.11.05, 11:57:55
Mike ,
Thanks for sharing your replication ,I know a lot of guys are in this for themselves !
I can see you are not one of them!
I have a question on the Electro magnet?
Mookie said an an AC electro magnet?
I see that Ac and DC mags are made diferently [heat dissapation issues]
Ac clamping and Flipping every cycle DC just clamping.
Perhaps I don't understand ?
Thanks
Chet
Hi Chet,
Experimentation will show if pulsed DC current will also work in Mookie's design.
Remember, that video Mookie showed was of his "earlier designs" and he had more advanced designs that he did not talk about. It is my belief that pulsed DC would will work in his design and I will try it out. :)
Larry Spring, and his "Spring Atom" theory says Yes, a Pulsed DC current will also create his "Magnespheres", which is a dynamic magnetic field.
I will try both AC current & pulsed DC current and report back my findings.
Mike
Hi Mike, yes I recall that paper now.
It's just that you know me, I tend not to take anyones's words for anything without absolute proof or independent verification from a reliable source. Although the Chris Eckman paper looks very professional, there are some things he states that gives me cause for concern, like this:
QuoteNormal water molecules exist in a bent shape, if this water
molecule were to gain electrons it would normally break down
into hydrogen and oxygen, hence electrolysis of water.
This is blatantly incorrect, this is not how normal electrolysis works at all. The water molecule does not gain an electron and break down into oxygen and hydrogen. And I'm afraid that once I've read something like this, it sets my alarm bells ringing and I immediately become sceptical as to the reliability of any of the information therein. It might seem unfair of me to disregard the whole paper because of this small thing, but it is a very elementry blunder, which I find rather worrying.
I stand by my motto:
Question everything. Sort the facts from the fiction. Verify the facts. Proceed with caution!
Quote from: Farrah Day on 2010.11.05, 15:15:17
Hi Mike, yes I recall that paper now.
It's just that you know me, I tend not to take anyones's words for anything without absolute proof or independent verification from a reliable source. Although the Chris Eckman paper looks very professional, there are some things he states that gives me cause for concern, like this:
This is blatantly incorrect, this is not how normal electrolysis works at all. The water molecule does not gain an electron and break down into oxygen and hydrogen. And I'm afraid that once I've read something like this, it sets my alarm bells ringing and I immediately become sceptical as to the reliability of any of the information therein. It might seem unfair of me to disregard the whole paper because of this small thing, but it is a very elementry blunder, which I find rather worrying.
I stand by my motto: Question everything. Sort the facts from the fiction. Verify the facts. Proceed with caution!
Hi Farrah,
Brown's Gas is a new phenomena, a new industry in the making. Discovered by Dr. Rhodes back in the 1960's, this gas was then named after Yull Brown after he "carried the torch" to a wider world audience. Then George Wiseman in the 1990's wrote booklets on how to make your own BG cell so that a simple "garage mechanic" could even build one. Bob Boyce in the 2000's describes his research and other have followed his designs since.
In all this time, over the past 45 years, no one has published a research paper on a gas spectrometer analysis of Brown's Gas. Chris Eckman is the first to do so. We now have data and proof what is Brown's Gas composed of. If you look at the chart on page 3, "Atomic Mass Analysis for Brown's Gas", you will see that the top 3 peaks of Atoms/Molecules are as follows:
1- Water Vapor
2- Diatomic Hydrogen
3- Plasma Expanded Water
To explain the unique properties of Brown's Gas, that can not be reproduced if just mixing plain tank Hydrogen & Oxygen gases together, Chris suggests a theory based on water molecules have more energy and are in small clusters called Rydberg Clusters.
"Rydberg Clusters are atoms and (or) molecules that are
weakly bound by the electrons and the electromagnetic force
together in miniature clusters."
Rydberg on Wiki:
Rydberg matter is a solid or liquid state of matter formed by
highly excited atoms (see Rydberg atom) or molecules (see Rydberg molecule). It was predicted around 1980 by É. A. Manykin, M. I. Ozhovan and P. P. Poluéktov.
Rydberg matter is a special state of matter, of the same standing as a solid or liquid phase. It might be a common form of matter in the Universe.[16] It is not similar to a gas, nor to a plasma, since it forms small particles (clusters) with a crystalline well-defined geometry. The particles are rather small, and large continuous pieces of Rydberg matter cannot exist [17].
In many cases, Rydberg matter is similar to what is called a dusty plasma with small clusters in a gas, like water drops in the air giving a fog or a cloud. A
Rydberg atom is an excited atom with one or more electrons that have a very high principal quantum number.[1] These atoms have a number of peculiar properties including an exaggerated response to electric and magnetic fields,[2] long decay periods and electron wavefunctions that approximate, under some conditions, classical orbits of electrons about the nuclei.[3] The core electrons shield the outer electron from the electric field of the nucleus such that, from a distance, the electric potential looks identical to that experienced by the electron in a hydrogen atom.[4
This is a good theory for Brown's Gas as it explains a lot of the properties using existing theories, such as Rydberg matter and atom.
Until more experiments are published and verified by more scientists, this theory is good for me. We have waited 45 years for someone to analyze Brown's Gas, hopefully it wont take another 45 years until someone else analyzes Brown's Gas. ;)
Mookie added a Magnetic Field inside the cell. This is a completely new development in Brown's Gas technology. No one has ever done this before publicly. In Mookie's one and only video to date, it clearly shows one of the properties of the Rydberg atom an "exaggerated response to electric and magnetic fields" where the gas bubbles are ejected out of the space between the plates 10-15X faster than non-magnetic fields Brown's Gas. That simple experiment shows something unique is going on inside the plates spaces where there is both an electric field and a magnetic field interacting with Brown's Gases. In the past and current BG designs, only the electric field is present. The addition of a magnetic field changes everything.
What is needed is more experiments to gather more data, that is what I hope to do soon.
Mookie Project Goals:1- Measure gas output in LPM vs. standard non-magnetic field electrolysis.
2- Compare energy content of gas with "bang" tests.
3- Run engine on gas.
Other Electrolysis Projects:- Zach West cell using Freddy Cell components besides the tube electrodes.
- Freddy Cell.
With more data we can progress into this new energy field so that others can follow.
Mike
Hi Mike, it's not that I'm being deliberately negative here, I'm just being my usual cautionary self, ie non-trusting and sceptical! ;)
I'm quite familiar with the history of the common-duct electrolyser. I've been playing with this stuff for a good few years now and in fact I used to be in regular email contact with William Rhodes himself.
What is not clear from Eckmans paper is how the 'Brown's Gas' he analysed was produced. I mean are we to assume that the resulting gases are the same from a straight dc common-duct electrolyser as they are from an equivalent pulsed system? Is he simply assuming that any common-duct electrolyser produces 'Brown's Gas'?
I've just re-read the paper, and though initially it reads well and very scientific, every time I see new things that put me on edge. This for example:
QuoteThe third peak is the one that was deemed unidentified by the
test, but it is proposed that this is the linear water isotope,
because it contains the weight of water with a few extra
electrons.
Linear water isotope... what? This makes no sense to me whatsoever, as an isotope is an atom with more or less neutrons - more or less electrons would simply make it an ion. Why would he call it an isotope? I think they should propose something else!
And another thing that is really bugging me is where are all these electrons supposed to be coming from to provide water molecules with additional electrons? If this was happening to any great degree, the current through the cell would be seen to diminish. Electrons from the cathode are needed to maintain the ionic current flow through the cell in order to produce hydrogen and oxygen in the first place!
I daresay most people merrily skim through Eckmans paper without fully understanding the implications of what is being said, and so are without any concerns or questions... but I have a list of questions as long as my arm! To my mind a lot of what Eckman states simply does not sit right with me. Hence, as scientific as it may seem, I'm extremely wary of this paper.
Quote from: Farrah Day on 2010.11.05, 18:32:12
Hi Mike, it's not that I'm being deliberately negative here, I'm just being my usual cautionary self, ie non-trusting and sceptical! ;)
I'm quite familiar with the history of the common-duct electrolyser. I've been playing with this stuff for a good few years now and in fact I used to be in regular email contact with William Rhodes himself.
What is not clear from Eckmans paper is how the 'Brown's Gas' he analysed was produced. I mean are we to assume that the resulting gases are the same from a straight dc common-duct electrolyser as they are from an equivalent pulsed system? Is he simply assuming that any common-duct electrolyser produces 'Brown's Gas'?
I've just re-read the paper, and though initially it reads well and very scientific, every time I see new things that put me on edge. This for example:
Linear water isotope... what? This makes no sense to me whatsoever, as an isotope is an atom with more or less neutrons - more or less electrons would simply make it an ion. Why would he call it an isotope? I think they should propose something else!
And another thing that is really bugging me is where are all these electrons supposed to be coming from to provide water molecules with additional electrons? If this was happening to any great degree, the current through the cell would be seen to diminish. Electrons from the cathode that are needed to maintain the ionic current flow through the cell in order to produce hydrogen and oxygen in the first place!
I daresay most people merrily skim through Eckmans paper without fully understanding the implications of what is being said, and so are without any concerns or questions... but I have a list of questions as long as my arm! To my mind a lot of what Eckman states simply does not sit right with me. Hence, as scientific as it may seem, I'm extremely wary of this paper.
Hi Farrad,
It looks to me that Eckman got his Brown's Gas from one of
George Wiseman Brown's Gas "welder units", for two reasons, first because he quotes George, and second because he lives in the same area as George. You can try calling or emailing Chris and ask specifically. I emailed Chris months ago without response to date, although I was not expecting a reply anyway.
There are not a lot of Brown's Gas units out there and since Chris is young and has chosen to research a famous "non-conventional energy technology," and has an "open mind" to discover/research new technologies, it looked to me that George might have even guided and asked Chris to do this analysis. This is all conjecture on my part but does seems to fit the facts.
In any event, the Brown's gas that Chris analyzed looked about right for a typical common ducted system, through my mind.
Your next question on "...where are all these electrons supposed to be coming from to provide water molecules with additional electrons?"
My answer:
The electrons are coming from the DC power supply through electrode plates themselves, and here is why. The
Rydberg cluster theory states that not all of the Brown's Gas electrolysis input DC power is in splitting 100% the water molecule completely into hydrogen & oxygen, but that a good percentage of the electrons instead binds to form the Rydberg water clusters. The gas spectrometer proves this out.
(http://i575.photobucket.com/albums/ss195/vrand01/HHOAtomicMassAnalysis.jpg)
The 3rd highest amount of atoms and molecules are what Chris calls
"Plasma Expanded Water" .
So as we can see, there are a lot of other atoms and molecules inside the Brown's Gas. This findings goes counter to the "Conventional Brown's Gas/HHO theory" which states, that it is a 100% mixture of hydrogen, oxygen in atomic or diatomic forms, or in para or ortho states. If Chris was using George's Brown's Gas, his generators are the most energy efficient electrolyzer generators one can buy "off the shelf" today.
In the graph above, the diatomic hydrogen came in second place, and the monatomic oxygen and hydrogen, were way down the list.
I am sure that if you analyzed a
Bob Boyce 101 plate cell, there would be more percentage of monatomic hydrogen & oxygen, but there are only a handful of units out there in the real world. What is needed is more experiments, data and analysis from the different Brown's Gases researchers units being built and discovered daily.
For example,
Fast Freddy ran his truck off his small tube cell unit in the truck bed. That design I would like to see the gas spectrometer readings on. I plan on building a unit. http://www.futureenergyconceptsinc.com/product/hydrogen-hog (http://www.futureenergyconceptsinc.com/product/hydrogen-hog)
Another electrolyzer design that I am currently building is based on
Zach West's spiral coil electrolyzer plates design.
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/ZachWest.pdf (http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/ZachWest.pdf)
West's design is very similar to Freddy's design where there are lots of electrode plate area that all fits inside a large GE water filter housing A special PWM will be pulsing the 2 plate electrodes with high voltage (12V DC) and high amperages (250 amps), to 60 psi cell pressure. That 1/2" thick walled GE house water filter is rated to 120 psi. http://products.geappliances.com/ApplProducts/Dispatcher?REQUEST=SpecPage&Sku=GXWH40L (http://products.geappliances.com/ApplProducts/Dispatcher?REQUEST=SpecPage&Sku=GXWH40L)
Mike
Mike, I think we have to be very careful in what we think we know from Eckman's gas analysis, especially as he himself is only theorising on certain aspects and some of that is based on Wiseman's theories. Hence much is still only theory.
QuoteThe electrons are coming from the DC power supply through electrode plates themselves, and here is why. The Rydberg cluster theory states that not all of the Brown's Gas electrolysis input DC power is in splitting 100% the water molecule completely into hydrogen & oxygen, but that a good percentage of the electrons instead binds to form the Rydberg water clusters. The gas spectrometer proves this out.
Now, what you have said above might make perfect sense to you, but give it some real thought and there are problems. For the cell to operate, it must pass a current. That current is ionic in the form of OH- and H+ radicals, and for current to flow through the cell and indeed the circuit, every time a hydrogen ion (H+) picks up an electron at the cathode, so a hydroxyl ion (OH-) drops an electron at the anode. Electrons can't simply pour off the cathode and create ions of water gas (H2O-). To complete the circuit and so allow current flow electrons must be deposited at the anode. This of course works perfectly well in Faraday Electrolysis, but not in the case of the water molecule ionising and leaving the liquid as a gas. Not only would this leave a surplus +ve charge within the cell, but it would effectively become a break in the circuit - and open circuit. Do you see what I'm getting at?
I see the chart, but I do not see that it supports the Rydberg water cluster theory. Clearly the 3rd highest peak appears to be ionised water vapour, but I personally think the term 'Plasma Expanded Water', is a little exotic and so likely somewhat misleading.
I've already highlighted a few inconsistencies and legitimate reasons why I'm wary of the paper and the results, but obviously my concerns are, for some reason, not bourne out by yourself. You must know that adding an electron to the water molecule is not how electrolysis works, and that an isotope is an atom with more or less neutrons... do these errors not bother you at all?
All I'm saying is that this paper has some obvious flaws and so cannot necessarily be taken as gospel. We too need to keep an open mind.
Farrah, thank you for your replies, and I agree that this is just a theory. More experiments and analysis are needed.
Thanks, Mike
If all post can be like the last 2 post , thing will be a lot easier and progress will be made a lot faster. Farrah Day i must say that im impress by the way you analyze and the way you stay critic. People often forget that the current science is the only reference point for the FE community , all device/idea/etc must first be compare with the current science, when the math AND experiment show divergence , OU perspective begin to appear but until it go against what we already know or the way we know, people should focus on fact and not interpretation/exotic thinking, its what make the difference between religion and science.
Keep up the good work!!
Best Regards,
IceStorm
Quote from: vrand on 2010.11.06, 00:00:04
Farrah, thank you for your replies, and I agree that this is just a theory. More experiments and analysis are needed.
Thanks, Mike
Mike, I'm glad you've taken my last fews post in the manner they were meant, that is simply as a cautionary note.
Once again with reference to Eckmans paper, here's something else that is incorrect. Top of page 3, right hand side:
QuoteSome things to note are the presence of monatomic hydrogen
and oxygen, but in very small parts. Normally monatomic
hydrogen and oxygen would bond right away to form H2 and O2,
but it does not in Brown's Gas, they remain ions. This helps to
prove that Rydberg clusters are forming.
Monatomic hydrogen and oxygen are not ions. Molecular hydrogen does not form from ions, it forms from atomic hydrogen - atoms, not ions. A very distinctive and important difference. Two hydrogen ions would and could not bond as, in the case of H+ which is just a proton, they would have no electrons to form a molecular covalent bond and would infact simply repel each other. I know I come across as nit-picking here, but this is afterall a scientific paper, so these small erronous details are significant.
I wonder if this paper was ever peer reviewed?
I'm fully aware that my negativeness may seem like I'm continually out to spoil the party, but this is not my intention, I'm simply trying to keep things balanced and real. Believe it or not I don't deliberately go out of my way to be the harbinger of doom and gloom.
It would be very interesting to see the gas analysis from Mookie's electrolyser, because if cavitation is occurring, then you would expect to see the presence of some hydrogen peroxide, and indeed other radical species not seen in Eckmans results. This may also be the case in some Meyer-like electrolysers that may also be creating some degree of cavitation.
Some of you may not have seen this before, if not you will find it quite interesting. Check out the following link featuring Dr. William Rhodes:
http://www.pureenergysystems.com/academy/papers/Common_Duct_Electrolytic_OxyHydrogen/
Just to add a little further food for thought here.
If we assume that the combination of the resulting gases evolving from a common duct electrolyser to be Rhode's gas, Brown's gas, HHO - or whatever term you choose to use - then clearly different electrolysers would likely produce various gases in different proportions, hence no two samples of Rhode's gas will necessarily be the same. This of course is very different to true Hydroxy, which is specifically just a stoichiometric combination of hydrogen and oxygen, and nothing more.
A common duct electrolyser may itself from time to time even produce variations of the gases evolving due to the nature of the water being electrolysed. The amount of dissolved gases and impurities may well mean that various samples of the evolving gas may to some degree be different.
With these common duct electrolysers, I see a combination of gases resulting, but I do not sense the over-Faraday results claimed by the likes of Stanley Meyers. I do not see any mention of unexplained great increases in gas production, rather I just see claims of the unusual properties of the resulting gas.
Which brings me nicely back to cavitation. Meyer and a few others always spoke of resonant or tuned systems, and that this tuning aspect was responsible for apparant over-Faraday gas production. Well if acoustic oscillations or indeed ultrasonic oscillations played a part, then cavitation was likely occurring and would seem to be the most obvious explanation for apparent over-Faraday gas production. I say apparent over-Faraday gas production, because of course Faraday's laws of electrolysis were not being broken, these laws would still apply to the gases evolving that were resulting directly from current flowing through the cells. However, by its very nature, cavitation does not require electricity per se from the supply source, as the fundamental energy required to initiate cavitation is a result of mechanical not chemical or electrochemical reactions. It's actually quite beautiful in its simplicity.
Let's say that we have an electrolyser that is drawing 5 amps dc from the supply source, and that this supply source is being pulsed. At any given frequency and voltage, a specific current flows through the cell which results in gas being evolved directly proportional to Faraday's laws. However, the cell is designed in such a way that the electrodes themselves will to some degree oscillate in line with the pulsing current, and when a certain energy threshold is reached, cavitation spontaneously initiates.
Now from the observers point of view, he or she will have steadily increased the voltage and seen the current, and so gas output, rise in accordance and proportionally... but then something incredible happens. When the cavitaion threshold is reached, the cell would appear to go into freefall, as the gas output is seen to increase dramatically and many fold, while the current remains steady. Furthermore this evolving gas would appear throughout the cell, not just from the electrodes, but emanating directly from within the water itself. Now I'm not saying that there is no price to pay for cavitation, as the mechanical oscillations will come at a price, but we would have already been paying this price to some extent before the threshold for cavitation was reached.
Many people would no doubt immediately deem this as the magical and mysterious phenomenon known as 'resonance', and while it is down to oscillations, in this instance at least, the term 'resonance' would be incorrect.
Quote from: Farrah Day on 2010.11.06, 08:55:00
Mike, I'm glad you've taken my last fews post in the manner they were meant, that is simply as a cautionary note.
Once again with reference to Eckmans paper, here's something else that is incorrect. Top of page 3, right hand side:
Monatomic hydrogen and oxygen are not ions. Molecular hydrogen does not form from ions, it forms from atomic hydrogen - atoms, not ions. A very distinctive and important difference. Two hydrogen ions would and could not bond as, in the case of H+ which is just a proton, they would have no electrons to form a molecular covalent bond and would infact simply repel each other. I know I come across as nit-picking here, but this is afterall a scientific paper, so these small erronous details are significant.
I wonder if this paper was ever peer reviewed?
I'm fully aware that my negativeness may seem like I'm continually out to spoil the party, but this is not my intention, I'm simply trying to keep things balanced and real. Believe it or not I don't deliberately go out of my way to be the harbinger of doom and gloom.
It would be very interesting to see the gas analysis from Mookie's electrolyser, because if cavitation is occurring, then you would expect to see the presence of some hydrogen peroxide, and indeed other radical species not seen in Eckmans results. This may also be the case in some Meyer-like electrolysers that may also be creating some degree of cavitation.
Some of you may not have seen this before, if not you will find it quite interesting. Check out the following link featuring Dr. William Rhodes:
http://www.pureenergysystems.com/academy/papers/Common_Duct_Electrolytic_OxyHydrogen/
Hi Farrad, I understand your posts are meant to be a cautionary note. My views are to "shine the light" on this wonderful technology that is at the start of a new energy industry.
Monatomic Hydrogen & Oxygen Ions actually exists.
-
Negative Ions (Anions) Positive Ions (Cations) Nomenclaturehttp://science.marshall.edu/castella/chm211/nomenclature2.pdf (http://science.marshall.edu/castella/chm211/nomenclature2.pdf)
- Peter Jardine, Ph.D., DCH Technology Inc. Valencia, CA used it in his company's product literature.
Technical Paper
Hydrogen Sensors for Hydrogen Fuel Cell Applicationshttp://www.powerpulse.net/techPaper.php?paperID=99 (http://www.powerpulse.net/techPaper.php?paperID=99)
- Here a scientist paper on the different chemical bondings:
CHEMICAL BONDING OF NEW ALLOTROPES OF HYDROGEN AND ITS MPLICATIONS TO FUEL SCIENCE"Extreme heat will encourage the formation of monatomic hydrogen ions rather than triatomic and polyatomic allotropes of hydrogen atoms."http://www.anl.gov/PCS/acsfuel/preprint%20archive/Files/45_3_WASHINGTON%20DC_08-00_0639.pdf (http://www.anl.gov/PCS/acsfuel/preprint%20archive/Files/45_3_WASHINGTON%20DC_08-00_0639.pdf)
- Wiki
"An ion consisting of a single atom is an atomic or monatomic ion.}"Formation of monatomic ionsMonatomic ions are formed by the addition of electrons to the valence shell of the atom, which is the outer-most electron shell in an atom, or the losing of electrons from this shell. The inner shells of an atom are filled with electrons that are tightly bound to the positively charged atomic nucleus, and so do not participate in this kind of chemical interaction. The process of gaining or losing electrons from a neutral atom or molecule is called ionization."
There is a lot of new and old info that needs to be gathered so that researchers can follow along in developing the HHO/Brown's Gas industry.
Mike
Add a catalyzed chemical reaction into the mix and you will have a nice mathematical mess of equations to postulate.
ie. NaOH + AL or Na + H20 via magnetic induction along with acoustical cavitation/resonance and pulsed DC electrolysis...
Cavitation Hydrogen Generator Patent (http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6719817.pdf) - Not sure if the claims made have any real merit.
So what is your goal or what are you after? Most efficient manner for on demand hydrogen generation?
Proving or debunking OU?
QuoteSo what is your goal or what are you after? Most efficient manner for on demand hydrogen generation?
Proving or debunking OU?
Personally I'm not interested OU one way or another. If things turn up to suggest OU, then so be it, but the concept of OU does not come into my immediate plans. On-demand gas generation is my greatest area of interest, so naturally the most efficiently this can be achieved the better!
QuoteMonatomic Hydrogen & Oxygen Ions actually exists.
Mike, I know what an ion is. :)
You have misinterpreted what I was saying. I feel semantics are playing a part here.
Eckman states that monatomic hydrogen and oxygen remain as ions and do not bond to form H2 and O2. All I was saying is that this is wrong as ions of hydrogen and oxygen will never combine to form molecular gases. You can't make a neutral hydrogen molecule from two hydrogen (H+) ions, which is what I was getting at, and which is what Eckman is implying.
Hence I was not stating that monatomic ions do not exist, rather just that the monatomic hydrogen and oxygen that Eckmans states remain as ions, are not ions in the first place, but atoms.
QuoteHi Farrad, I understand your posts are meant to be a cautionary note. My views are to "shine the light" on this wonderful technology that is at the start of a new energy industry.
Mike don't get me wrong, I love this stuff and would dearly love to be able to run my car on an on-demand electrolyser system, and indeed this would be my ultimate goal. It's just that there's an awful lot of pseudoscience and misinformation to wade through, so I'm simply and continually striving to sort the facts from the fiction.
I wonder how carefully you have studied that Atomic Mass Analysis of Eckman's. I'm finding it quite hard to get it to a size and resolution whereby I can see the writing on the chart clearly. But after some close inspection and intense scrutinising I'm finding it very interesting.
The two peaks representing diatomic hydrogen are clearly not isotopes as Eckman states, but quite simply molecular gases, the respective masses do not suggest the addition of a neutron.
From left to right, the second diatomic hydrogen peak shows a mass of 2.02. No problem there - stable molecular hydrogen, 2 protons, 2 electrons. The first diatomic hydrogen peak however, with a mass of 2.008 appears to be molecular hydrogen that is lacking in mass. But given that an electron is 1/1836 the mass of a proton, this discrepancy is surely too great to be simply down to missing electrons. Curiouser and curiouser. However, I think it logical to at least contemplate that this peak is depicting a deficiency of electrons. So we would therefore appear to have nearly as much charged molecular hydrogen as we do neutral molecular hydrogen. This I would not expect and I'd say is likely quite an anomaly in itself.
If we look at the water vapour peaks, here again, no isotope but a minor mass discrepancy that again suggests that the water molecule in one peak is carrying a charge. Again very odd, as this would mean that we also have nearly as much charged water vapour as we do neutral water vapour. It looks very much to me that the second water vapour peak likely has a surplus of electrons. So, either these peaks are due to some anomaly in the instruments or the way the instrument takes the readings, or there are two distinct forms of molecular hydrogen formed from common duct electrolysis along with at least two maybe three distinct forms of water molecule.
Now, the really curious thing for me is that Eckman does not attribute an atomic mass to the unidentified peak that he proposes is Plasma Expanded Water. Why is this I wonder? Originally I thought the figure was 22.992 before I determined that this figure was in fact for the following peak, sodium. As the elements and compounds get progressively heavier as we move to the right of the chart, we can assume that this so-called Plasma Expanded Water peak must lie between the 18.042 of the second water vapour peak and 22.992 of the sodium peak. And, although it seems like rather a high percentage, it does put us firmly in the mass territory of deuterium oxide, or heavy water (D2O), atomic mass being 20.04. And ah! An isotope at last!
Without knowing the exact figure for the atomic mass of this mysterious peak, we can only postulate. However, I feel the presence of D2O is more likely than simply water that has expanded due to taking on additional energy or electrons - which would surely show only a very slight variation in mass when compared to the other two water vapour peaks.
Whatever, from the chart we do seem to have gases that carry a charge, and so by very definition would be plasmas. However, we do have to take the accuracy of the readings on good faith.
Quote from: Farrah Day on 2010.11.06, 08:55:00
It would be very interesting to see the gas analysis from Mookie's electrolyser, because if cavitation is occurring, then you would expect to see the presence of some hydrogen peroxide, and indeed other radical species not seen in Eckmans results. This may also be the case in some Meyer-like electrolysers that may also be creating some degree of cavitation.
Some of you may not have seen this before, if not you will find it quite interesting. Check out the following link featuring Dr. William Rhodes:
http://www.pureenergysystems.com/academy/papers/Common_Duct_Electrolytic_OxyHydrogen/
How was Meyer able to vibrate a set of tubes with electrical pulse if he ever did? Could be the holy grail he has been hiding with statements like " voltage does work". I guess if you can get the cavitation part going the applied voltage is minimal.
Quote from: Yaro on 2010.11.07, 02:43:45
How was Meyer able to vibrate a set of tubes with electrical pulse if he ever did? Could be the holy grail he has been hiding with statements like " voltage does work". I guess if you can get the cavitation part going the applied voltage is minimal.
A good question Yaro, and something that I'd never given any real thought to until recently. However, now I'm looking at things from a different perspective and I'm seeing possibilities that have never occurred to me in the past.
What I do think, is that if Meyer was creating cavitation, I don't think he was aware of it. I have never found any reference to cavitation anywhere in Meyer's papers. And, if anyone else looking in has, then please point it out.
Now, consider that any current carrying conductor will set up its own magnetic field, and that any other current carrying conductor in the immediate vicinity will also do this. When these magnetic fields interact they will either cause the two current carrying conductors to move towards each other or move away from each other, depending on the direction of current in each. This can be demonstrated very easily with two copper wires in close proximity, and is after all the principle by which electric motors and generators operate. This is also where Flemming's generator and motor rules come into play. But don't take my word for it, all this is very easy to research on the net.
http://theory.uwinnipeg.ca/physics/mag/node10.html
http://dept.physics.upenn.edu/~uglabs/lab_manual/force_between_conductors.pdf
So what I'm proposing is that two closely spaced electrodes within an electrolyser would to some extent also exhibit these properties. Hence, with each pulse of current they would attempt to move as a direct reaction to the magnetic fields produced. However, unlike the armature of an electric motor, they are fixed so cannot so obviously turn, or move up and down, by way of a reaction... but they may well oscillate as the attempt to do so. And if they oscillate enough, I would expect that there comes a time whereby the threshold of cavitation is attained.
These are the lines along which I'm focussing all my efforts at present.
Quote from: Farrah Day on 2010.11.07, 09:35:26
http://theory.uwinnipeg.ca/physics/mag/node10.html
http://dept.physics.upenn.edu/~uglabs/lab_manual/force_between_conductors.pdf
So what I'm proposing is that two closely spaced electrodes within an electrolyser would to some extent also exhibit these properties. Hence, with each pulse of current they would attempt to move as a direct reaction to the magnetic fields produced. However, unlike the armature of an electric motor, they are fixed so cannot so obviously turn, or move up and down, by way of a reaction... but they may well oscillate as the attempt to do so. And if they oscillate enough, I would expect that there comes a time whereby the threshold of cavitation is attained.
These are the lines along which I'm focussing all my efforts at present.
Farrah,
Thanks for those two references. The force between the wires is directly proportional to the square of the current. This reinforces my conviction that CURRENT drives the cell.
Quote from: Yaro on 2010.11.07, 16:13:42
Farrah,
Thanks for those two references. The force between the wires is directly proportional to the square of the current. This reinforces my conviction that CURRENT drives the cell.
Yep, the magnetic fields produced are proportional to the current, which as such, then becomes the prime mover, not the voltage.
If you apply this to Fast Freddy's cells which are using pulsed dc at very high currents, then there is certainly going to be some oscillation of the anodes and cathodes. Every chance we're seeing cavitation there too, and all of a sudden some form of tube tuning actually becomes relevant!
Of course, conversely, Meyer always claimed his cells were voltage driven, with very low current. But I guess it all depends on how much faith you are prepared to put in Meyer's claims and indeed his version of science. In my particular case, after spending days reading through his technical brief some years ago, I... well let's just say it's there if we run out of toilet paper! ;)
One more thing: the magnetic force is also proportional to the permeability of free space, that means the non-magnetic 316 ss is another disinfo. The 410 ss steel may be a much better option.
Quote from: Yaro on 2010.11.07, 22:59:43
One more thing: the magnetic force is also proportional to the permeability of free space, that means the non-magnetic 316 ss is another disinfo. The 410 ss steel may be a much better option.
What free space? Not sure what you are getting at here, but 410 ss is far less corrosion resistant than the 300 series, particularly if you are using such as lye as an electrolyte, so I'd personally stick with 300 series. I'm not worried about any magnetic property, if it can conduct and so carry a current that's fine by me - the magnetic field provided by the current is all I'm interested in!
I am refering to the magnetic permeability in the formula, mu. Now, won't a higher permeability metal offer a greater magnetic force, putting aside the corrosion issue?
Look at the formula again. It seems to me a magnetic metal would require less current to achieve a certain treshhold of force as opposed to a non-magnetic metal.
Quote from: Yaro on 2010.11.08, 04:54:24
I am refering to the magnetic permeability in the formula, mu. Now, won't a higher permeability metal offer a greater magnetic force, putting aside the corrosion issue?
Yes.
QuoteLook at the formula again. It seems to me a magnetic metal would require less current to achieve a certain treshhold of force as opposed to a non-magnetic metal.
Correct, but I expect what we will need to determine sooner or later is how much gas is produced via electrolysis and how much by cavitation and at what individual efficiencies in terms of power. Afterall, Mookie is employing quite a big electromagnet. So what I'm saying is, reaching the cavitation threshold earlier would certainly mean that we would have less normal electrolysis in action. If cavitation is the prime gas producer then it may be the way to go, but if not, then higher current through the electrodes to reach the cavitation threshold would be quite acceptable as we would be inducing more normal electrolysis.
At the end of the day, there are other ways of increasing the permeabilty and indeed strengthening the magnetic flux. I've been playing with tubes rather than plates, and I can increase the permeability quite simply by inserting a soft iron rod into my inner tube, and gluing and sealing it in place. I can also insert a neo and glue and seal that in place. Experimentation is the key, suck-it-and-see, but at this point I'd rather not have the worry of my SS corroding prematurely.
FD, I am looking for a method to determine if cavitation really has anything to do with this effect.
I'm NOT saying yes or no, I just have no "Useful" method for study. The unit, in the video, does
not seem to produce any gas, nor any obvious cavitation effects, unless it's charged and working.
To me, from the layman's point of view, this would seem to indicate that cavitation is not taking
place, but it could be very close, and the charge on the plates is just enough to start the process?
What I'm really looking for is a way to check which of the two forces is really at work. The mechanical
motion or the changing mag field.
Do you think that directly connecting two plates mechanically and inducing the motion while keeping
the mag field external would be effective, as in, could such a setup move the plates effectively
enough to cause the "Cavitation" process, or would that mechanical connection loose the impulse
energy? I really have no idea, as it's not the type of work I have much experience with.
I Have worked with the "Sonic" cleaners for parts, etc. and never thought till right now about
simply dropping two plates in there, but all the units I have seen are SS. I guess the inside of
the tank would need coating, and I doubt anyone will let me modify their unit in such a way,
but maybe I can find an old one....
Just looking for ideas and clues, as the one time I had a really efficient unit running, it was with
a coil on each side of flat plates. Only was running once, correctly, but very well. I would like
to try to define the operation a little better. Any Ideas or comments? All are welcome.
(Note: A High power VCR tape demagnetizer works well for a re-production of the basic test.)
Hi Art, long time no speak!
Quote from: Loner on 2010.11.08, 20:56:00
FD, I am looking for a method to determine if cavitation really has anything to do with this effect.
I'm NOT saying yes or no, I just have no "Useful" method for study. The unit, in the video, does
not seem to produce any gas, nor any obvious cavitation effects, unless it's charged and working.
To me, from the layman's point of view, this would seem to indicate that cavitation is not taking
place, but it could be very close, and the charge on the plates is just enough to start the process?
What I'm really looking for is a way to check which of the two forces is really at work. The mechanical
motion or the changing mag field.
This is exactly what I'm currently trying to determine myself. If you read through my previous posts on this subject you will see that this is of major importance to me.
QuoteDo you think that directly connecting two plates mechanically and inducing the motion while keeping
the mag field external would be effective, as in, could such a setup move the plates effectively
enough to cause the "Cavitation" process, or would that mechanical connection loose the impulse
energy? I really have no idea, as it's not the type of work I have much experience with.
This is the main area of contention Art. I'm not even sure we would need the magnetic field if we were mechanically inducing cavitation. Unlike many of the others here, I see cavitation as a reaction to the mechanical movement of the plates that themselves are induced to oscillate due to the interaction of the magnetic field created by the current flowing through the cell and the Electromagnet flux, which is pulsing at mains ac frequency. If you see what I mean. Ohmasa seems to be creating cavitation independently of electrolysis itself and getting good results - and this would not seem to involve magnetic fields.
I'm of a mind that the magnetic field produced by the Electromagnet is itself doing nothing at all to the water. Water is not magnetic, so will not react to the EM. However, once a current is flowing through the cell, then both the electrodes and the ion current will be creating their own magnetic fields which certainly will interact with the EM flux.
I have detailed more of my thoughts here, if you have no seen it:
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=406.0
QuoteJust looking for ideas and clues, as the one time I had a really efficient unit running, it was with
a coil on each side of flat plates. Only was running once, correctly, but very well. I would like
to try to define the operation a little better. Any Ideas or comments? All are welcome.
(Note: A High power VCR tape demagnetizer works well for a re-production of the basic test.)
I feel like I've been stumbling around in the dark for years, and now all of a sudden, thanks to Mookie, a light has come on and I'm seeing things for the first time with great clarity. Parts of the puzzle seem to be dropping nicely into place and it's all actually starting to make sense!
After reading your other post, and checking a few things for myself, I realize that there IS more going on than what I thought, myself. The cavitation looks like a likely prospect. If so, as I really have no proof, either way, then it is the actual desired effect, whether produced by magnetic fields, or otherwise. I will say, for certain, that a mag field is the easier method to produce the required movement.
I must state that I have personally seen that water CAN be directly affected by a mag field. Once the water is ionized, that is. Also, even if the water is not, once a current is passing through it, the same can be said. This now leads me to the theory that you are on the right track as both those methods of "Moving" or affecting the water are for the purpose of producing the cavitation effect, and not for any unusual purpose that cannot be described. (I like this as it "Feels" right. Hard to explain that one...)
Just for the "Fun" of it, I'm going to drop a couple "Painted" piezio elements into water and see what difference this makes. If I "BOND" them to a plate, each, then I should be able to produce the effect, without the mag field? I'll see what happens as this is an easy and quick thing to do. (Well, it will take me a week or so to get it all together. I'm getting slower every day...)
Thanks for the insight into your thoughts, as ALL of the work I have seen, starting WAAAY back, could be traced to this type of effect and I wouldn't be too amazed to find the true reasons for these effects has been sitting in front of us the whole time.
Quote from: Loner on 2010.11.09, 02:00:06
I must state that I have personally seen that water CAN be directly affected by a mag field. Once the water is ionized, that is. Also, even if the water is not, once a current is passing through it, the same can be said.
Yes, so what you have witnessed is, at least to my mind, not the water molecule itself being affected by a magnetic field, but rather ions within the water, be they -OH and +H or ions from an electrolyte. Obviously any current drawn through the cell by a voltage on the electrodes is down to the movement of these ionic species which will create their own magnetic field. If water is passing a current to produce electrolysis, we know that ion charge carriers are responsible, and once moving they will be influenced by an exterior magnetic field. Of course, even without a voltage across electrodes to induce ionic current flow, random ionic movements will also create small magnetic fields that can be influenced by an exterior magnetic field, but again this has nothing to do with an action or reaction of the water molecule itself.
I think of it this way. The electron is a charged particle that is influence by an electric field, but it is not magnetic. Hence it is not influenced by an exterior magnetic field until it is set in motion, as in a CRT.
Cavitation is a mechanical action, and I'm sure that we could achieve this affect without electrolysis happening at all, it's just that by using pulsed current carrying electrodes, we are able to get both electrolysis and cavitation occurring via one power source. What interests me, is whether or not the combined action of these two relatively different processes somehow produces more gas than either would individually for the same combined energy. I would certainly expect that under these conditions the electrodes would suffer less gas polarising the surfaces.
QuoteThanks for the insight into your thoughts, as ALL of the work I have seen, starting WAAAY back, could be traced to this type of effect and I wouldn't be too amazed to find the true reasons for these effects has been sitting in front of us the whole time.
I feel the same. Looking back and going over past claims, I can now see the possibility that cavitation may have been playing a big part all the time, it's simply that no one realised it or understood the processes involved. And, if you look at Mookie's video and watch how not much happens until a certain threshold is attained, but once reached the cell is transformed by gas, then you can see how the idea of resonance came about. It now seems to me that people were looking for the wrong thing and in the wrong places, and ultimately led others down a giant rabbit hole and into wonderland. We might just be back in the real world now!
Fast Freddy is the latest person to claim to have a vehicle running on just water. A bloody big truck at that! After stating that he was going to open source his set up, he's now gone very quiet, which is not a very good sign, but which is par for the course. Whether his claims are true or not is a big unknown at this time, and he's really not doing himself any favours credibility-wise by drawing this out and playing silly buggers. However, if he is for real and his claims are genuine, for the current he states his electrolyser is drawing, he is producing 10 times more gas than Faraday's laws state he should be from standard electrolysis. Now Freddy also talks about tube tuning, so if cavitation is in effect here too, then it would appear that the majority of the gas he is producing (90%) is coming via cavitation.
Very interesting and indeed exciting times at present.
Found an interesting video filmed at 12500 images per second regarding Cavitation Bubbles inside water drops in Microgravity:
1. Electrical discharge generates hot plasma.
2. Plasma expands to cold cavity.
3. Unstable cavity collapses rapidly.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gR0YBAhY2PQ
Quote from: ramset on 2010.11.09, 13:07:48
Cavitation
Suddenly the possibilities seem so logical !
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06iCfowinUM
Me thinks we''ll be learning an awful lot this winter !
Or summer depending on where you call home.
Chet
Chet:
I am sorry, but I am going to be tough about that Witts clip "World's Most Efficient Overunity Water Heater" that you seem to be endorsing.
This is a junk clip, and I really mean pure junk. Witts has no credibility with anybody, even on the free energy forums. That clip was faked all the way. I watched it a few years ago and groaned. They simply filled the metal sphere with very hot water before they started recording. Did you see them filling the sphere at the beginning of the clip with cool water, where the water passed over the presenter's fingers to prove that it was not excessively hot? Of course you didn't see that even though it would have been very easy to do. It's a pure scam, and every clip the sleazy Witts boys make is a pure scam. All of the talk in the clip about resonance to make water magically heat via a mysterious over unity phenomenon and whatnot is pure bullshit, an outright lie.
You need to work on analyzing clips with a critical eye. You are not learning anything with that clip, you are unlearning.
I noticed that someone did a response clip with some text comments overlayed on the video: "Sarcastic Re-post of 'The Over-Unity Water Heater'"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKgNjWzg4NM&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKgNjWzg4NM&feature=related)
I only glanced at the clip, so I am not sure what he says in his comments.
MileHigh
I will just offer my two bits about cavitation. My comments have nothing to do with electrolysers at all.
Cavitation means that you create sufficient negative pressure in water so that you pull it apart and overcome its self-stickiness. The cavity you create consists of low-temperature steam. Note that the boiling temperature of water decreases the lower you make the ambient air pressure. If the air pressure is zero and you are at 20 C, then the water instantly boils away.
If you somehow create small cavitation bubbles that are perfect spheres then the ambient air pressure causes the cavitation bubbles to collapse. The moving water that is pushing in on a perfectly symmetrical collapsing bubble eventually all crashes together at the center point of the bubble. This causes a hydraulic-shock-type release of energy. Apparently in some cases this gives off light and creates a super-hot pin-point of matter that is hotter than the sun for a very very short amount of time. Any keeners out there would know that this hydraulic shock energy release event is identical to the spark you get from open-circuiting an electrical inductor.
Anyway, these cavitation collapse events are all CoE processes in and of themselves.
MileHigh
Chet:
I'm banned from OU, so I will start a thread here somewhere.
MileHigh
I agree with @MH on the NitWitts. As for Mookie's accelerator being due to cavitation, no way is it possible the way he is showing it. Cavitation, like our friendly little shrimp has shown us many times is accomplished by compressing and then releasing. There is no possible compression area in what he is showing. What Mookie is doing is simply vibrating the plates so gas bubbles get off the plate surfaces as fast as possible thus increasing available surface area over time at a given former gas saturation point.
It is a good idea and can be very easily used in a car with the cars own vibration sources.
Quote from: wattsup on 2010.11.10, 01:00:47
I agree with @MH on the NitWitts. As for Mookie's accelerator being due to cavitation, no way is it possible the way he is showing it. Cavitation, like our friendly little shrimp has shown us many times is accomplished by compressing and then releasing. There is no possible compression area in what he is showing. What Mookie is doing is simply vibrating the plates so gas bubbles get off the plate surfaces as fast as possible thus increasing available surface area over time at a given former gas saturation point.
It is a good idea and can be very easily used in a car with the cars own vibration sources.
I assume you have written this before reading through the whole thread. If you had read through the whole thread you may find that what you have just stated is not entirely logical. First off, if it were just a case of simply moving the evolving gases off the electrodes faster, then the current draw to the cell would rise considerably, as all this polarisation does is inhibit current flow. Furthermore, it would be a progressive process, but this does not seem to be the case. What I'm saying is that there is a certain threshold that has to be reached before the effect is evident.
You also seem to be totally ignoring the fact that the electrode plates are carrying a current and so will react to the EM flux. I accept that this may not be your area of interest or expertise, but you really should read the whole thread and get up to speed before posting.
Farrah,
Have a look at the following paper when you get some time.
Ultrasonically-excited electrolysis Experiments at Energetics
Technologies:
http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/DardikIultrasonic.pdf
Experimental results and discussion of 3 electrolysis cells with built in ultrasonic transmitters to induce cavitation in the electrolyte.
A significant amount of excess heat was generated and a very large COP was obtained in several experiments.
Largest excess power: 34 watts
Largest excess energy: 3.5MJ
Largest COP: 3000%
Longest duration of excess heat in a single experiment: 40 days
Quote from: iquant on 2010.11.10, 12:49:09
Experimental results and discussion of 3 electrolysis cells with built in ultrasonic transmitters to induce cavitation in the electrolyte.
A significant amount of excess heat was generated and a very large COP was obtained in several experiments.
Largest excess power: 34 watts
Largest excess energy: 3.5MJ
Largest COP: 3000%
Longest duration of excess heat in a single experiment: 40 days
They are are doing electrolysis with a palladium cathode and deuterium and producing a lot of heat, not hydrogen. Sounds to me like Cold Fusion but they are afraid to call it so.
Yaro,
I have no idea as to the science behind the claims.
Ultrasonic induced cavitation is the part that caught my eye as it appears to be on point for purposes of this thread.
Do we need high power magnets to attract the ions or would a much lower power acoustic vibration accomplish the same.
Just food for thought.
Science and its findings on cavitation and SBSL [a brief summary]presented by Wilby!
Very cool I might add!
http://physics.open.ac.uk/~swebb/briefguide.htm
Chet
@Farrahday
QuoteWhat I'm saying is that there is a certain threshold that has to be reached before the effect is evident.
Now your talking my language ;) In all my experiments without exception there is a fine boundary and either all the correct conditions are satisfied to perfection and and the process changes or they are not satisfied and you have normal operation, that is the way it works. Is it any wonder that so many have failed in everything they do when they make a half-assed attempt at best and then decide it cannot possibly work?, lol. I think success it about clarity and precision, it is about understanding what has to happen, why it has to happen and how it must happen in every excruciating detail and this understanding translates into reality.
Somehow I have this feeling that if someone is going to pull this off it just might be you, best of luck.
Regards
AC
Thanks for that AC.
At this stage I'm honestly unsure as to whether or not the bubbles in Mookie's viideo are simply pockets of water vapour that evolve due to the breaking of the water tension which is creating low pressure areas within the liquid, but it does seem rather odd that a certain threshold needs to be reached before this happens.
Cavitation would certainly go someway to explaining a lot of past claims, but it still remains to be shown that the gases are hydrogen and oxygen or free radicals rather than just bubbles of water vapour.
As you say the key would be getting everything right, and indeed the way the cell is constructed - the way the electrodes are mounted - would then play a more important role. This element of the design and build may also explain why it appears to have been so hit and miss in the past. I'm now close to a stage where I can start running some tests, and hence hopefully provide some more conclusive results.
Farrah,
Checkout this youtube experimenter: fastimports3
http://www.youtube.com/user/fastimports3
He performs some interesting experiments which may be relevant to your experiments:
Flame observation of Water Fuel Cell and Cold Fog Generator:
http://www.youtube.com/user/fastimports3#p/u/10/togMTKLHOIg
Check out sound pressure waves created by flame being introduced to Ultrasonic Transducer in operation:
http://www.youtube.com/user/fastimports3#p/u/3/TPpx-zXRZBY
Cold Fog Gen with Water Fuel Cell test:
http://www.youtube.com/user/fastimports3#p/u/8/z8ck7ZerFJ4
Iq
I believe that a fogger (or mister) simply atomises water, hence what we are seeing is tiny droplets of liquid water. Any gas, even H2O would be invisible. Most of these you-tube videos are very unclear, and the people experimenting always seem to assume they know what is occurring, when in fact they offer no more than conjecture and wild speculation. More often than not, these people don't have the slightest clue about what they are saying or doing, or how to make measurements, so ultimately the videos are useless at best, misleading at worst.
As per usual family commitments and time constraints tend to slow progress, but hopefully I'll have some concrete answers soon.
Farrah,
What struck a chord with me from viewing the experiment videos a few times was the effect on the butane flame between:
Steam and Cold Fog:
The Steam / mister experiments would extinguish the butane torch but the
ultrasonic transducer generated cold fog would grow the flame.
about 3:00 into http://www.youtube.com/user/fastimports3#p/u/8/z8ck7ZerFJ4
@FarrahDay
QuoteAt this stage I'm honestly unsure as to whether or not the bubbles in Mookie's viideo are simply pockets of water vapour that evolve due to the breaking of the water tension which is creating low pressure areas within the liquid, but it does seem rather odd that a certain threshold needs to be reached before this happens.
Cavitation would certainly go someway to explaining a lot of past claims, but it still remains to be shown that the gases are hydrogen and oxygen or free radicals rather than just bubbles of water vapour.
I would agree, the only facts we have at the moment is the fact that we have none as such I have put a few other builds on hold and begun putting this device together as we speak. I seem to have this compulsive and somewhat childish need to build damn near everything I am uncertain about which keeps me on my toes I guess. Im not entirely sure cavitation is occuring here but we will know one way or another soon enough.
Regards
AC
Quote from: iquant on 2010.11.11, 14:47:28
Farrah,
What struck a chord with me from viewing the experiment videos a few times was the effect on the butane flame between:
Steam and Cold Fog:
The Steam / mister experiments would extinguish the butane torch but the
ultrasonic transducer generated cold fog would grow the flame.
about 3:00 into http://www.youtube.com/user/fastimports3#p/u/8/z8ck7ZerFJ4
I'm never quite sure what I'm supposed to be watching in these videos and quickly tire of trying to decipher them. Might as well reproduce the experiments myself and get a first hand take on things.
My SWAG theories are based on:
Evidence that ultrasonically-induced microbubbles carry a negative electrical charge (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6TW2-46SXR3V-15&_user=10&_coverDate=12%2F31%2F1992&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=browse&_origin=browse&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=35a63ccb4fdc5916f293da0038a0c835)
The abstract states they estimate the field to be about 7 × 105 V m−1
FastImports3 Discussion: http://www.ionizationx.com/index.php/topic,1239.msg13146.html#msg13146
Claiming, if i interpret the discussion properly, "Stan Myers system had nothing to do with electrolysis... pure sound waves aka ultrasonic vibrations shreds the water.
They didn't have ultrasonic transducers when Stan was doing research. He made his own for the job. "
Think this is worth revisiting the saturated NaOH - H2 production but using ultrasonic agitation instead of magnetolysis?
Based on previous discussions you always questioned where electrons would come from...
Seems a plausible answer might be from the cavitating micro bubbles...
Hi,
I have an ultrasonic cleaner at present for repair. If this can be utilised I'd be happy to oblige in some way. If you have an experiment in mind then....
Its a 55 Watt sweep frequency unit, (ultrasweep M U, from L and R manufacturing NJ USA.)
Once repaired it will need a functional test and after the obvious, an experiment shouldn't hurt, lol.
Steve.
Szaxx,
The experiment is fairly simple but be careful this is really caustic stuff...
Use your ultrasonic cleaner to agitate a supersaturated solution of NaOH at a temp > 65.1C < 100C
See if a sodium reaction generating H2 can be induced as theorized below:
This is a cut--paste from one of Farrah's previous posts on a different forum:
Closed Loop Electrolyzer: http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/5809-closed-loop-electrolyser-3.html
-------------------------------------------------
Sodium metal is extremely reactive and under normal conditions relatively unstable. If we put a piece of sodium metal, (Na), in water it reacts violently, producing sodium hydroxide (lye) and hydrogen (and heat - it's an exothermic reaction).
2Na + 2H2O = 2NaOH + H2
While the hydrogen rises out of the solution, the sodium hydroxide produced will remain in the water forming ions 2Na+ and 2OH-.
Now of course, because this seems to be unknown territory, the chemistry is somewhat unclear and very debatable, but consider this scenario.
A head on collision between a sodium ion Na+ and a hydroxyl ion, OH-... what would happen? What if the energy of the collision was such that the sodium ion temporarily took the electron from the hydroxyl ion?
Na+ + OH- = Na + H + O
Or balanced in favour of molecular gases
2Na+ + 2OH- = 2Na + 2H + 2O
In this scenario we now have highly reactive pure sodium metal in the water, which will instantly react with a water molecule to form sodium hydroxide and in doing so release more hydrogen.
2Na + 2H2O = 2NaOH + H2
The sodium will always remain in the solution, but the water content will gradually reduce as it is dissociated and evolves as gases.
The process outlined above relies on the sodium ion collecting an electron from somewhere in order to become an atom. There are no electrodes from which to do this and we know anyway that H3O+ reacts ahead of Na+ in a normal electrolyser, so it would have to be taken from a –ve ion already within the solution.
I don't know if the reversible reaction above or indeed the chemistry has any merit in reality, but at least it provides one possible explanation.
---------------------------------------------------
This all kind of evolved from this thread:
The downfalls of conventional electrolysis - and how to fix them
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=9448.0
Hi,
I do have some NaOH crystals but not much. This is worth investigating, the chemistry you suggested would hardly explode in my face as the cavitation spheres would be very small im sure, but safety is always a worthwhile action, just incase..... lol.
The unit has been immersed for some time in a solution and the board is a little, well missing, so I'll change all the relevant parts on its driver and output, then the experiment will begin soon.
Steve.
I got my EM today but do not have a variac. I get a variac next week then I start.
Did any of you start yet?
Here is my effort at replicating Mookie's experiment.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6OIcjNl66E
12V, 6A. The electromagnet was set at 70V and it pulled 0.66 amps.
I used six 4 inch pizza cutters I bought from The Dollar store.
My observations:
The higher the amp draw the better the production.
I won't call it an avalanche. Accelerated production is a better term.
The container wall has to be thin. I tried a 3/8 " thick Plexiglass and it did not work.
Yaro
We can not thank you enough for taking the time to share these experiment !
Excellent!
Chet
.
In an electrically powered wire, current flow and magnetic field are coupled and inseperable.
In an electrolysis cell circuit there is a "sweet spot" in which this coupling is vulnerable.
That is the gap between the electrode plates.
By applying a relatively stronger exernal magnetic field corresponding to the existing magnetic field in that gap
one is able to accelerate the electron flow. That is the basis of my accelerator.
What is conclusive about the laws governing electricity and magnetisim is that there is no free lunch.
Alone or combined, permanent magnets, DC electromagnets, pulsed DC electromagnets, or DC electromagnets
in other forms such as toroids or solenoids, require physical movement in order to affect electrical current.
In the case of AC, physical movement is not required, but the effect comes at a higher cost in terms of input energy.
This, at least, has been my experience and is what Grumpy speaks about elsewhere,
in a different application, and quite correctly describes.
.............................................
Farrah
There remain several electromagnetic concepts/applications that I have yet to fully test in terms of
creating acceleration solely using DC power (which was my original goal).
There is no reason for me to believe that they will be successful,
but I stilI plan on spending a portion of this year to that end.
Some of my testing may inadvertantly run parallel to your planned specific experiments in the area of resonance.
I will certainly share with you anything I find along that line, that I think would be of interest to you.
..I wont be posting for some time in the near future, as my leisure time is at a premium.
Mookie
.
Quote from: Mookie on 2010.12.26, 04:47:02
Some of my testing may inadvertantly run parallel to your planned specific experiments in the area of resonance.
I will certainly share with you anything I find along that line, that I think would be of interest to you.
..I wont be posting for some time in the near future, as my leisure time is at a premium.
Mookie
Fair enough Mookie, but I do look forward to comparing notes in the near furture. It's simply too cold for me to experiment in a freezing greenhouse at present, so roll on the warmer weather.
It's still your electron avalanche effect that does not sit right with me, as electrons are not the charge carriers in a liquid unless you create a high current plasma, which clearly you are not doing. Also, the magnetic fields of the EM and the current through the electrolyser will still interact whether or not the plates are physically moving. However, it seems to be the physical movement of your plates that is the important factor in your set up rather than simply magnetic field interactions.
It will be nice if, sooner or later, we can determine exactly what the crucial factors are and thereby eliminate much of the speculation.
All the best.
I've had time over Christmas to take another look at some things and do a bit of further study while I wait for the weather to warm up a tad.
If you haven't already looked at this, then I urge anyone interested in what might be happening in Mookie's electrolyser and/or cavitation to take another look at the info provided by this link that Chet provided earlier in this thread.
http://physics.open.ac.uk/~swebb/briefguide.htm
There is a lot of information in the above paper that I personally find intriguing, if not fascinating. So much can be happening in a pulsed cell that it may well be some time before science has nailed it all.
Incidentally, I've finally got around to emailing Chris Eckman, of 'Plasma Orbital Expansion of the Electrons in Water' paper, fame. I've detailed some of my concerns on his paper as diplomatically as I'm capable of - the points of concern that I've already highlighted earlier in this thread. Whether or not I'll get a reply is, of course, another matter entirely.
I have been looking at my cell in the dark for flashes of light and I have not been able to see any. Mookie, do you see flashes of light in your cell?
I am thinking may be, the intermolecular forces are weakened by the vibration so the isolated H2O molecule becomes easier to split.
Quote from: Yaro on 2010.12.31, 01:15:46
I have been looking at my cell in the dark for flashes of light and I have not been able to see any. Mookie, do you see flashes of light in your cell?
I am thinking may be, the intermolecular forces are weakened by the vibration so the isolated H2O molecule becomes easier to split.
Yaro, you will see from that link in my last post that certain conditions need to be met for sonoluminescence. I really recommend that you print it off and take time to study it, as it is really informative. When I read information like that it hits home just how much we are yet to learn and understand on this subject. And it seems every few years someone or some team fit another piece of the puzzle in place - or at least forward a new theory to explain things. Very interesting stuff.
By all accounts, the luminescence observed in Dave Lawton's cells does not come about by acoustics, as luminescence was evident after the cell was switched off. That is why I believe that Lawton's luminescence was due to plasma discharges within the pores of the mineral coating on his electrodes.
.
I was previously able to determine that without vibration using magnetic means,
nothing in the way of acceleration occurs in my set up. I confirmed this with 3 tests:
- By immersing both the electromagnet and plate assembly into a solution in direct contact with each other,
without a barrier or gap between them, nothing other than magnetic attraction occurs while the cell is powered.
That was somewhat predictable in that the magnet holds the plates firmly in place, not allowing them to vibrate.
There is no effect on electrolysis. If anything, the direct contact just completes the circuit.
- I have run tests with the plates vibrating by purely mechanical (non magnetic) means while the cell was powered.
Other than the standing wave-rippling effect of the solution, nothing out of the ordinary occurs.
These were good vibration tests producing, both similar, as well as much larger waves than as seen in the vid clip.
- With only the electromagnet operating without the cell powered, there are only standing waves..no bubbles.
If this is cativation, I have been unable to create that effect without use of an electromagnet during electrolysis.
As for sonoluminescence, the "streamers" described in the sonoluminescence link are much in evidence in my set up.
The bubbles continuously and randomly erupt, or eject, from the plates (much like those clips we've all seen of solar flares)
then follow the magnetic field lines until such time as they escape the cell. This has always been most remarkable to me.
They are not affected by a second external magnet which makes it even less understandable. That particular article,
as it is written, brings back the possibility of resonance. But until such time as my demo is replicated all I can offer
are my own observations.
I am one to look at my own understanding and explanation of things with a great deal of scepticism ..always the first in line
to put them to the test to disprove them. To be quite frank, I cant explain this acceleration with my own conventional
understanding of things, so what I am left with to account for it is my earlier explanation, and am no further ahead
in being able to disprove anything to anyone, including myself. But as to how seriously I regard this "discovery",
I somehow doubt that I will soon be standing in Stockholm explaining this friggin' thing after hearing the words
" And this year's Nobel Prize winner ..is Mookie".
Mookie
Quote from: Mookie on 2011.01.08, 01:26:18
.
I was previously able to determine that without vibration using magnetic means,
nothing in the way of acceleration occurs in my set up. I confirmed this with 3 tests:
- By immersing both the electromagnet and plate assembly into a solution in direct contact with each other,
without a barrier or gap between them, nothing other than magnetic attraction occurs while the cell is powered.
That was somewhat predictable in that the magnet holds the plates firmly in place, not allowing them to vibrate.
There is no effect on electrolysis. If anything, the direct contact just completes the circuit.
Agreed, I too would expect nothing to happen in the above scenario. Yet there would surely still be pulsing magnetic fields throughout the surrounding solution, which to my mind, and contrary to your thinking, does tend to discredit the magnetic field itself as being a major component of the phenomenon.
Quote
- I have run tests with the plates vibrating by purely mechanical (non magnetic) means while the cell was powered.
Other than the standing wave-rippling effect of the solution, nothing out of the ordinary occurs.
These were good vibration tests producing, both similar, as well as much larger waves than as seen in the vid clip.
This is the key test really, but it is not necessarily conclusive because as you have shown, a certain energy level has to be achieved when using the EM before the effect is seen. So it could be that either this energy level was not achieved or other variables such as frequency were not comparable.
Quote- With only the electromagnet operating without the cell powered, there are only standing waves..no bubbles.
This test tends to suggest that cavitation of the water solution is not the factor, but rather that the pressure waves created due to the oscillating plates are acting upon the bubbles of hydrogen and oxygen. These gas bubbles would then be stressed to a point wherby that might implode as in cavitation and hence produce further reactions leading to the production of other radicals like H2O2, which are not seen in standard electrolysis.
Quote
If this is cativation, I have been unable to create that effect without use of an electromagnet during electrolysis.
As for sonoluminescence, the "streamers" described in the sonoluminescence link are much in evidence in my set up.
The bubbles continuously and randomly erupt, or eject, from the plates (much like those clips we've all seen of solar flares)
then follow the magnetic field lines until such time as they escape the cell. This has always been most remarkable to me.
They are not affected by a second external magnet which makes it even less understandable. That particular article,
as it is written, brings back the possibility of resonance. But until such time as my demo is replicated all I can offer
are my own observations.
I personally think that you may simply not have hit upon the right set of varaibles when trying to achieve the effect without the electromagnet, and I'm still convinced that the magnetic field plays no part in the effect other than causing the plates to vibrate in the first place. With regards to the streamers you see, these can be caused by the low pressure areas within the fluid, and have nothing to do with magnetic fields. This would fall in line with compression and rarefaction of the fluid due to sonic waves travelling throughout the solution.
Have you ever done this experiment with a cell whereby the plates cannot oscillate? I ask as you would still have the pulsing magnetic field, just no physical vibration of the plates.
Quote
I am one to look at my own understanding and explanation of things with a great deal of scepticism ..always the first in line
to put them to the test to disprove them. To be quite frank, I cant explain this acceleration with my own conventional
understanding of things, so what I am left with to account for it is my earlier explanation, and am no further ahead
in being able to disprove anything to anyone, including myself. But as to how seriously I regard this "discovery",
I somehow doubt that I will soon be standing in Stockholm explaining this friggin' thing after hearing the words
" And this year's Nobel Prize winner ..is Mookie".
......................................
As for those that also build their own cells, I see no reason why this acceleration cant be replicated with a tube cell.
I do not build tube cells, as I like to see as much as what occurs (and am blessed with poor welding skills).
If you envision the set up in the vid ..the magnetic field created by the DC current-flow between the plates
runs exactly along the same field lines as in the AC electromagnet. That's what makes it work.
If one were to wind the full length of the outer tube with standard covered wire they would create a solenoid.
If that solenoid was DC powered, very little, if anything would result other than a weak static magnetic field.
If it was AC powered, a switching (N/S) magnetic field would be created, but again, little would happen
as these magnetic fields are both relatively weak without a permeable core. I would think that this has been tried before.
Using 300 series s.s. would make this a simple air core solenoid...so nothing dramatic should really be expected to happen.
By using 400 series s.s. for the tubes, the outer tube would now become a hollow core electromagnet.
By powering the tube cell with DC and the solenoid with AC, one would create the same condition as in the vid
..just a different configuration by removing the spacers, except for at one end, to allow for the inner tube to vibrate.
I have not done this myself, but would venture to say that the results would be the same. Not claiming it, just proposing it.
Nothing unsafe about a set up like this even in KOH. Having a voltage regulator on hand is always nice.
I will do this myself in future, but anyone reading this is welcome to look into it.
At the very least it would be an inexpensive project if anyone sees merit in it.
..but perhaps I've been spending too much time in the sun.
Mookie
http://img.youtube.com/vi/G9Glw3BUTAQ/0.jpg (http://img.youtube.com/vi/G9Glw3BUTAQ/0.jpg)
.
I know I'm at odds with you on this, but I just don't see water being influenced in this way by a magnetic field. I'm still strongly of the opinion that it is all related to the physical properties of the oscillating plates. Remember Ohmasa seemed to be achieving the same thing as yourself from a mechanism oscillating the solution within a cell, and without any magnetic influence. http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Ohmasa_Gas_by_Japan_Techno_Co.,_Ltd.
I see the sonic waves acting as a catalyst to standard electrolysis that induce the resulting H2 and O2 gases to implode, rather than any kind of acceleration being down to electron avalanche, which as you know, I personally don't see as being in anyway scientifically sound.
The great thing about all this is the mystery... whatever will we do when we know exactly what is happening and what the key contributing factors are? :)
Something just occurred to me!
Farrah, I know you are not convinced of the magnetic field being a factor here, but as I was reading some of your earlier posts re: the second magnetic field generated by the plates and considering the 'right (or left) hand rule, I suddenly recalled something that I've seen before. It may or may not be related, and at the risk of sounding idiotic, I'll toss it in for your consideration... and/or maybe mookie is still looking in.
A one point (several years ago) in my earlier exposure to this 'field' of study I recall seeing some info regarding the interaction of TWO PULSED MAGNETIC FIELDS at 90 Deg. angles to one another (in an inverted "T" shape) creating some strange, anomalous effects! At the time, I essentially dismissed what they were talking about due to a lack of any sort of substantiation...But I must admit the theory was fairly intriguing... and here now again, we find mookie's set-up WOULD indeed be producing that very thing, wouldn't it? The plates themselves creating a vertical magnetic field, and the electro-magnet producing a field in the horizontal plane at the midpoint (bloc wall) of the other judging by the video. And he's exhausted his ability to explain the anomalous results...
I haven't yet found that information again, but I will keep digging. As I recall, though, the theory behind what they were claiming was that anomalous effects were observed at the junction point of the two magnetic fields and were due to the stress induced by the magnetic fields attempting to align themselves to one another (both shear and radial). However, I do believe they were using a very high frequency on their coil type electro-magnets(?). That one bit of data stuck, but not much else. I'll send you links if I can find them again and you are interested....
In your research have you ever run across anything of that nature?
Could stresses of that nature provide enough of a disruption, confusion, or stress in the molecular bonds of the water wherein the current passing through the electrolyte would then be rendered much more effective?
I know that magnetic fields themselves are not well defined or understood, but there has to be an explanation for this effect and it does appear that mookie is evolving hho in his setup (by his admission) vs. the different variation of gas in say the Ohmasa mechanical type. This could be fairly easy (at least on my limited 'mind-bench') to test by manually mounting two strong neo's in very close proximity to one another (trying various different relationships) and seeing if any effects show up in different locations within their combined field of interaction perhaps just by using a small wire size electrode and anode.
It's a half-cocked, crazy speculation, but the light went on and I thought I'd share it anyway. (If for no other reason than to be of entertainment value to the discussion... ;D)
groundhogAddendum:
After considering and doing some more digging on the above I found the quote below for your consideration:
Quote
The product of pole strength and- magnetic length>(the distance between its poles) of a bar magnet gives its magnetic moment (M).
Vr ; i.e.. Magnetic moment (M) = m X 2/: = 2m/.
, ... This is a vector quantity. Its direction is along the axial line of the magnet from south to north. It is measured in Ampere - metre2 or Am2.
If we consider the magnetic vector quantity as calculated above... is it possible that we might be seeing an increased electrolysis due to an increase in the medium's current density caused by the magnetic forces present, ie (magnetic moments, vector, and torque)? Would we necessarily create a greater current draw from the power source during this process, or would the magnetic field provide the additional current density? How could this be measured with a pulsing field?
Still digging...
GH
As Mookie said in an earlier post ,your above observations Sound like what Grumpy has been saying,and he [Mookie] suspects this could be a valid speculation.
Chet
PS,Mookie still reads and comments here,as he knows we keep no secrets,And really are all about open source.
QuoteIf we consider the magnetic vector quantity as calculated above... is it possible that we might be seeing an increased electrolysis due to an increase in the medium's current density caused by the magnetic forces present, ie (magnetic moments, vector, and torque)? Would we necessarily create a greater current draw from the power source during this process, or would the magnetic field provide the additional current density? How could this be measured with a pulsing field?
Not really sure there is any real value in this line of thought as any increase in current within the fluid would also be experienced by the supply current, and everything would still obey Faraday's Laws. So yes, just like adding an electrolyte, if magnetic interactions did somehow lower the resistance of the fluid, then more current would be drawn from the power supply but the gas evolving would still be directly proportional to the current. Only if the voltage to initiate electrolysis is somehow reduced would we see any effective gain in gas output for any given power. Faraday's Laws would still be in effect, but electrolysis would require less power in terms of V x I, as we could operate at a lower V.
I saw you referenced a bunch of my fogger vids. If you want a weird experiment to do close fogger off in room of house and watch the torch flame change. I believe this is due to electrons being ripped off and the water is being staged or primed as Stanley puts it. I'd like to make some Rodin coils to add to it next.
DO NOT ADD ELECTROLYTES TO COLD FOG GENERATORS IT DESTROYS THE DISK QUICKLYafter revisiting and learning a lil more I recommend tear transformer from switchmode power supply like a computer and driving it with a 200watt or so audio amplifier using computer tone gen program. I think you will be happy with results.Stan used pwm to drive a bifilar and trifilar makes more sense when you see specs on transformer and realize your using pwm to drive it.
(http://api.ning.com/files/WD20OYLOiEMwetddLwdkquf8u*d5LCvpITZ8BfjCDqgyeH4VJPOwJINkthcsXAEPC1gxLvlUStrfR14GeSg-2ZeHP-E9Vque/FWBDP.jpg?width=750)