My EPG Buiding Progress

~Russ

RE: My EPG Buiding Progress
« Reply #25, on November 11th, 2011, 09:14 AM »
Quote from Farrah Day on November 11th, 2011, 08:08 AM
Quote from phil on November 11th, 2011, 04:48 AM
In the new Zealand video Stan explains the magnetic gas, parts 8-11
Hi Phil, do you have a link to that video?
Download this:
http://www.ringsbyruss.com/youtube/P2_The_Key_To_Stanly_Myers_Water_Car_Gas_Core_Transformer_Self_Staining_Device.flv

and also watch theses:

http://rwgresearch.com/open-projects/stanley-meyers-wfc-tec/stanley-meyers-epg-system/lectureopen-descion-of-my-work-on-the-epg-system/

there is parts 1 and 3 the part 2 you need to download to watch...

also read this thread:

http://open-source-energy.org/?tid=41

enjoy, ~Russ


phil

RE: My EPG Buiding Progress
« Reply #26, on November 11th, 2011, 10:35 AM »
the you tube channel i saw them on was 'stanleymeyersvideos'
The 3 part series russ did breaks down stans talk nicely

Farrah Day

RE: My EPG Buiding Progress
« Reply #27, on November 11th, 2011, 10:48 AM »
Ok, thanks for that Russ.

As I see it, Meyer is actually talking about a magnetic gas rather than solid magnetic particles suspended within a gas core.  Now this for me is a real problem, because gas is just NOT magnetic.  So whatever is old Stan going on about?

Furthermore, even a suspension of magnetic nano-particles in a fluid would soon all just clump together. Something is clearly not right here.

But these are not the only problems I see. Meyer might call it an Electrical Particle Generator, but certainly I cannot see it as any kind of accelerator given its geometry.  Unlike the Hadron Collider, Meyer's EPGs would suffer from severe bottle-necking due to the 90deg bends. These 90deg bends will restrict the flow of whatever substance is actually moving within the core, limiting the velocity and hence limiting the output.  With this design, particle acceleration would just be a short blip before terminal velocity was reached.

To my mind, Meyer has quite a few things confused, and he confuses others by what he says. He draws a gas atom and talks about it being magnetised, but I really don't think Meyer is thinking about a magnetic gas, but rather an ionised gas (plasma) or an ionised fluid (an electrolyte).  Neither of which are themselves magnetic, but both of which will react to an external magnetic field which will induce them to move and hence then induce their own magnetic field.

Just my thoughts.

phil

RE: My EPG Buiding Progress
« Reply #28, on November 11th, 2011, 11:13 AM »Last edited on November 11th, 2011, 11:15 AM by phil
Quote from Farrah Day on November 11th, 2011, 10:48 AM
Ok, thanks for that Russ.

As I see it, Meyer is actually talking about a magnetic gas rather than solid magnetic particles suspended within a gas core.  Now this for me is a real problem, because gas is just NOT magnetic.  So whatever is old Stan going on about?
He was using his electron extraction process to make different elements bond that would not normally bond together. and as a result he was getting new chemical compounds with properties we havent seen before, like a magnetic gas and god knows what else.

Have a look in the "light and energy" thread on this forum.

In the new zealand vid stan talks about "hundreds of thousands of new chemical compunds comming about as a result of this technology"


~Russ

RE: My EPG Buiding Progress
« Reply #29, on November 11th, 2011, 11:46 AM »
Quote from phil on November 11th, 2011, 11:13 AM
Quote from Farrah Day on November 11th, 2011, 10:48 AM
Ok, thanks for that Russ.

As I see it, Meyer is actually talking about a magnetic gas rather than solid magnetic particles suspended within a gas core.  Now this for me is a real problem, because gas is just NOT magnetic.  So whatever is old Stan going on about?
He was using his electron extraction process to make different elements bond that would not normally bond together. and as a result he was getting new chemical compounds with properties we havent seen before, like a magnetic gas and god knows what else.

Have a look in the "light and energy" thread on this forum.

In the new zealand vid stan talks about "hundreds of thousands of new chemical compunds comming about as a result of this technology"
yeah, Farrah Day its confusing and hard to wrap your head around but it could be done... also think of it like a standers generator but using tinny magnets. it will not need to go that fast... read the dealership Manuel. it has a lot more details on this!!!!!

http://open-source-energy.org/rwg42985/russ/Patents/Stan%20Meyer%20Dealership%20Sales%20Manual%201986.pdf

~Russ

Farrah Day

RE: My EPG Buiding Progress
« Reply #30, on November 11th, 2011, 12:15 PM »
Stan seems quite happy to constantly flout the laws of physics, but there are good and well established reasons why some elements will not bond with others.  

You have to be really careful and stay open-minded when you watch these videos. People without a scientific background can easily be impressed with the jargon, and take it all in as fact, without question. However, it would be extremely foolish to blindly take what Meyer says on face value.   There are many clues in these videos that point to Meyer's less than adequate understanding of science and indeed the devices he claims to have invented.

At one point he talks about the exhaust gas from a car running from his WFC, being returned to the intake to slow down the burn rate of the hydroxy. The problem here, is that the exhaust gases will just be water and nitrogen from the air, and hence absolutely no different to what is already being drawn through the intake in the first place.

But to go back to an argon/iron gas, well just think for a moment about how he said he was getting this. He was ionising both argon and iron, by forcefully removing electrons from both.  Both then would be +ve ions and have absolutely no covalent bonding attraction whatsoever. And that's apart from the fact that iron is a liquid below 2862 degC and not magnetic in a gaseous state. It simply makes no sense.

Sometimes you have to question these things, dig a little deeper, and do a little research, because often all is not quite as clear-cut as it may first appear.

phil

RE: My EPG Buiding Progress
« Reply #31, on November 12th, 2011, 12:15 PM »
http://open-source-energy.org/forum/attachment.php?aid=352

A patent from nissan that uses recycled exhaust gases. Im currently experimenting with this with some success. The trick is to cool, condense and remove the water vapour out of the exhaust gases. After all the water is the 'ash' in a hydrogen powered engine. You dont want much of it getting back to the intake as before long the engine will be too wet to run. The excess oxygen in the ambient air causes too fast a burn of the hydroxy in the combustion chamber. It burns with a concussive explosion as opposed to an expansive explosion, all the energy is given off near the top of the power stroke instead of it being released over more of the pistons downward travel.

You might want to check out the EPG patents for more info on the permanently magnetized particles.

Farrah Day

RE: My EPG Buiding Progress
« Reply #32, on November 12th, 2011, 01:23 PM »Last edited on November 12th, 2011, 01:58 PM by Farrah Day
Hi Phil, that patent talks about the non-combustive gases argon and CO2 being added to dilute the hydroxy, which makes a lot more sense, but greatly complicates things. Meyer never speaks of anything along these lines.

Phil, you are wrong about the excess oxygen in air. Oxygen is only an oxidiser, and as we would already be producing a stoichiometric amount of 2H2 and O2 that would then react to create water, the oxygen in ambient air would pass through as exhaust gas too. So the oxygen in ambient air will not make a lot of difference, and the exhaust gases will consist of ambient air - primarily, 20% O2, 79% N2, 1% other and excess water vapour.  There might be a small amount of oxygen that will react with the nitrogen to produce nitrogen monoxide, but as this requires temperatures in excess of 2000 degC, even in a combustion chamber this will likely only be a tiny amount.

That said, even if these recycled exhaust gases are fed back into the WFC system in a controlled manner at some stage before combustion they will have the same effect of diluting the hydroxy. So maybe there is some mileage in this approach of feeding back of gases.  

Particularly with Meyer, and contrary to what some people will have you believe, I find there are a lot more questions than answers. And those people who do claim to have it all figured out and indeed have all the answers are really just kidding themselves, as in reality Meyer's science rarely adds up.  That's not to say there is nothing worth pursuing here - I truly think there is, and indeed it's a passion of mine - but I'm certainly not naive enough to take Meyer's preaching as gospel, or for that matter blindly follow his - or anyones - version of science without question. It really does pay to keep and open mind, but it also pays to question everything.


lol, I've only been here for a few days and I already have a reputation of -2.

I'm sorry if some of you folks feel that I'm treading on your toes or being negative, but that is simply not the case.  I'm not discouraging anyone to experiment, and I certainly have a greater grasp of science than many, so why the negatives? Is it that some of you feel threatened by an alternative perspective?  Would either of you like to elaborate?

I'm finding the EPG fascinating, but I'm all about is getting to the truth, and sometimes this means cutting through the crap and clap-trap.  I'm only sceptical because I can see the flaws and inconsistencies that evidently many of you can't. Furthermore, I think these issues should be highlighted and brought into discussion rather than simply left as accepted truths. Bad science is bad science, and it won't go away because you prefer to overlook it.  Suspect science needs to be discussed, it needs to be disected and it needs to be evaluted for what it really is.  C'mon, there's really no point in living in a fantasy world.

Proeliator53

RE: My EPG Buiding Progress
« Reply #33, on December 8th, 2011, 02:13 PM »Last edited on December 8th, 2011, 02:39 PM by Proeliator53
I'm wondering on my EPG system. The patents never claim gas ionization process being used on the gases fromt he fuel cell, therefor I'm excluding this process altogether. From one of the photos, I see insulative coating (red) on the copper tubing. this makes me think that I should dip my EPG into some polyurethane, and keep the tubing insulated from each other. I'm figuring that this would create a short when magnetix particles accelerate inside. I also think that the if the spark gap is used that the entire EPG tubing has a vacuum. any thoughts from anyone?
I'm thinking of something in addition.  I use Muriatic Acid and Hydrogen Peroxide to make Cupric Acid I believe?  Anyway, my point is that it dissolves copper, and turns a pretty bright green (lol awesome lava lamp!).  So I'm wondering if it's possible to dissolve iron into this acidic solution.  Iron is magnetic, and I think there would be minute almost near particles of iron in this solution.  My thoughts are if you was to make glass tubing, and wound copper coils onto this glass tubing (no insulative means would be required as glass is obviously an insulator).  My "out there" thoughts would be to use the magnetic accelerator, since a pump is sorta outta the question with an acid.  Unless there is one that won't dissolve I'm sure some type of plastic is possible for that???   But back to what I was thinking.  The iron would be dissolved into this solution (whatever concentration).  This "solid magnetizable particles" would then accelerate (via magnetic accelerator) and attain a magnetic polarity, then pass by pick up coils wond on the glass tubing.  

This is an "out there" kinda thinking, but please give me some feedback on yhis idea?

freethisone

RE: My EPG Buiding Progress
« Reply #34, on December 8th, 2011, 05:36 PM »
Greetings, I Normally keep quiet when it comes to brilliant minds at work. I like to observe.

I just would like to add some thought I have about Stan Myers.

 He did the work, And he must draw the conclusions.
Keep in mind he wanted to patent. He must keep a little hush hush.
He needed to determine how the device worked. He did a great job, opened up a new field of study. Clearly these very simple principles, may be a little more complicated then we understand today.

On the reuse of exhaust gasses, this is just the same principles as a catalytic converter.  Not much to mull over there, environment friendly is always a good consideration..

On the iron type magnetic particles. These are not per say in a gas state. only suspended because of the size of the dipole, Less than 10 nano.
 There must always be a dipole. Electrons perhaps also react in the same manner. Science can not answer this question with mathematics.

The gas is not necessarily a hydrogen oxygen like you are accustomed to with HHO devices. It has cations, and anions. Extensions of the carbon strings.

The principles are taken not at face value, but with great certainty. More will be discovered along the way. The experimenter will determine through observation, and experimenting. Trial, and error we are lucky we are dealing with his success.

The time will come, and better explanations will become available at a later time.
For now we follow along, as experimenters we do not discard what is already available for review. We try to verify his conclusions. What he did, or may have said in order to keep his secrets from others is irrelevant.. We have two patents to compare, and they jive well with the scientific principles..

Take care, keep on going forward. Peace.:-/
 Forget about what science has to say, verify what can be determined, and all who dare to endeavor will succeed. Cheers.


~Russ

RE: My EPG Buiding Progress
« Reply #35, on December 10th, 2011, 03:07 AM »
Quote from Proeliator53 on December 8th, 2011, 02:13 PM
I'm wondering on my EPG system. The patents never claim gas ionization process being used on the gases fromt he fuel cell, therefor I'm excluding this process altogether. From one of the photos, I see insulative coating (red) on the copper tubing. this makes me think that I should dip my EPG into some polyurethane, and keep the tubing insulated from each other. I'm figuring that this would create a short when magnetix particles accelerate inside. I also think that the if the spark gap is used that the entire EPG tubing has a vacuum. any thoughts from anyone?

I'm thinking of something in addition.  I use Muriatic Acid and Hydrogen Peroxide to make Cupric Acid I believe?  Anyway, my point is that it dissolves copper, and turns a pretty bright green (lol awesome lava lamp!).  So I'm wondering if it's possible to dissolve iron into this acidic solution.  Iron is magnetic, and I think there would be minute almost near particles of iron in this solution.  My thoughts are if you was to make glass tubing, and wound copper coils onto this glass tubing (no insulative means would be required as glass is obviously an insulator).  My "out there" thoughts would be to use the magnetic accelerator, since a pump is sorta outta the question with an acid.  Unless there is one that won't dissolve I'm sure some type of plastic is possible for that???   But back to what I was thinking.  The iron would be dissolved into this solution (whatever concentration).  This "solid magnetizable particles" would then accelerate (via magnetic accelerator) and attain a magnetic polarity, then pass by pick up coils wond on the glass tubing.  

This is an "out there" kinda thinking, but please give me some feedback on yhis idea?
hello buddy!

so yeah, i think that you could do such a thing but im not sure what the results would be.

when using a spark gap to create the  iron particles you are really creating an iron ion. so to get this to attach to the argon in this case we need to take some electrons away from it so the iron ion will attach to the argon with missing electrons.    

any way just some thoughts but one thing that even the ferro fluid im going to try will not do is "permanently magnetized" gas...

so we must keep this in mind as it was in the patent ... "permanently magnetized"

~Russ

hhott99

RE: My EPG Buiding Progress
« Reply #36, on December 15th, 2011, 05:20 AM »
This looks promising! Does the magnetic gas exist in a vacuum of air, or is it simply added to the tube along with air? I assume also that the coils are all wound the same direction? Great work!

phil

RE: My EPG Buiding Progress
« Reply #37, on December 15th, 2011, 06:31 AM »
I do remember seeing videos from a company called magnagas, they claim to have a magnetic gas. The videos showed balloons attracted to metal. I've no idea if they are genuine or scam artists. But when your epg is done russ it may be worth contacting them to see if they would fill it for you?

~Russ

RE: My EPG Buiding Progress
« Reply #38, on December 15th, 2011, 01:44 PM »
Quote from phil on December 15th, 2011, 06:31 AM
I do remember seeing videos from a company called magnagas, they claim to have a magnetic gas. The videos showed balloons attracted to metal. I've no idea if they are genuine or scam artists. But when your epg is done russ it may be worth contacting them to see if they would fill it for you?
we have contacted them and the answer i think the answer is no. i will dig up the emails.
i cant find them right now?

thanks!
~Russ
RE: My EPG Buiding Progress
« Reply #39, on December 15th, 2011, 01:46 PM »
Quote from hhott99 on December 15th, 2011, 05:20 AM
This looks promising! Does the magnetic gas exist in a vacuum of air, or is it simply added to the tube along with air? I assume also that the coils are all wound the same direction? Great work!
i just got contact by a man named Paul and he is seeing some interesting results with his GEET ans magnetized gas under a vacuum. ???

ill see if he will post here and share what he has been up to.

~Russ