Quote from zaneaussie on September 21st, 2013, 06:43 PM

Brown's gas is still hydrogen and oxygen but the way the molecules hang together are different. It is essentially a more complex matter structure. The scientific term is Rydberg Matter. In other words we now have matter that when configured in this manner extracts energy from the zero-point vacuum. It is this excess energy produced from the zero-point that makes running a car on hydrogen possible and without it impossible. How these clusters form is anyone's guess and Moray King does make some suggestions, but more experimentation is needed. Electropolishing for example could assist with the formation of these clusters but I am sure there are more than one way to do so, frequency, waveforms, voltages etc etc

Again, I'm not convinced by Eckmans Orbital Expansion theory. I think people can be putting a little too much faith in Chris Eckman, after all, apart from the results from the spectrometer, much of what he says is only conjecture. It is well established that water molecules are not all just H2O, but also form molecules such as H3O2 and H5O2, and indeed can form a variety different shaped clusters due to hydrogen bonding. All I am saying is don't take everything on face value.

Also, bear in mind that what Lamare and myself are proposing in terms of the science is open to debate and indeed until proven, is just conjecture.

So, I for one do not believe Brown's Gas to be just oxygen and hydrogen, because quite simply we know that if conditions whereby plasma electrolysis and cavitation can take place, that we get numerous other species being produced. Start pulsing your cells and getting a mineral layer forming and you start to create conditions inducive to plasma electrolysis.

Quote from Farrah Day on September 22nd, 2013, 01:29 AM

Start pulsing your cells and getting a mineral layer forming and you start to create conditions inducive to plasma electrolysis.

That's exactly what I think Meyer once did and as s result of that stumbled across some interesting anomaly at some point, perhaps as a result of him having done some form of conditioning on his cell, which he then pursued further and thus ended up formulating the physical properties involved in the process just to please the patent office clerks.
Point being I think that the cell itself needs some form of semiconductor or dielectric layer of sort or you won't see the Meyer effect at all.
Or as you say something else has to be introduced in the process which totally changes the way the cell works.
Regardless, as a result of these last few days of discussions here I've shifted focus from the electric aspects feeding the cell to the intrinsic physical properties of the cell itself, I think that's where you'll find the secret sauce.

I used to be in regular email contact with William Rhodes, discussing his findings and the field of electrolysis and WFCs in general, and always found him to be a very decent, down-to-earth guy. It's been a few years since I've made contact with him, and to be honest I'm not sure he is even still with us as he was no spring chicken then.

Anyway, for anyone that has not seen it, here is a link to William Rhodes' paper detailing his findings related to common duct electrolyser gases. If you have never seen or read it, do so. It's extremely informative.

http://brownsgas.com/browns-gas-oxyhydrogen-hho-gas/browns-gas/william-rhodes.html
As far as Chris Eckman is concerned, long ago I read his paper: 'Plasma Orbital Expansion of the Electrons in Water', and did my own in-depth analysis of it.

I found quite a few blatant errors in his science that concerned me and was unable to see how he came to the conclusion that that the water molecule was somehow electrically expanded.

The most interesting and useful info came from his mass spectrometer findings which were accompanied by a detail graph.



The one peak on Eckman’s gas analysis graph that demands the greatest attention has to be the 5th highest peak that he labels as, ‘Plasma Expanded Water’.  We know this lies somewhere between the atomic mass 18.042 of the second water vapour peak and the 22.992 atomic mass of the sodium peak, but for some reason he does not provide an exact figure. And as the x axis of the graph is clearly not linear, it may be that this substance still has an atomic mass of 18… something, and so would be a third water vapour peak, and due to excess electrons, be heavily negative in nature, ie an ion.

It seems quite apparent that the biggest difference between hydroxy gas from tanked or bottled hydrogen and oxygen when compared to that of a common-duct electrolyser gases, is the water vapour content.

Whereas you would expect there to be none (or very little) water vapour in bottled hydrogen and oxygen due to the drying process, water vapour is clearly abundant in the gas mixture evolving directly from a common-duct electrolyser.

As bubbles of hydrogen and oxygen erupt from the surface in an electrolyser, the hydrogen bonding of the water maintains a thin film of liquid water over the emerging gases and indeed it is the encompassing liquid water film that highlights the gases in the form of visible bubbles.  As the evolving gases leave the surface of the water, the hydrogen bonds try to maintain their hold, but at some point the surface tension becomes too great and the bubble effectively pops.  This action will cause some molecules of the liquid water to be thrown up where it can evaporate into gaseous form.  Hence we get water vapour along with hydrogen and oxygen from our common-duct electrolysers.

Now, to my mind, this will happen with any common-duct electrolyser, be it straight dc or pulsed, and indeed any electrolyser whereby the resulting hydrogen and oxygen are not passed through a drier. So the question is: Is simple water vapour a major player in the properties of common-ducted electrolyser gases?

If you think about it, because of the abundance of water vapour, the one thing we that we can't readily get from our electrolysers unless we introduce gas driers, is just pure oxygen and hydrogen.

So, if we consider a stoichiometric mix of pure oxygen and hydrogen to be what is known as Hydroxy or Oxyhydrogen, then what we produce in even standard DC common duct electrolysers is not the same because at the very least it contains a lot of water vapour.

Throw in pulsing electrolysis, with the possibility of creating plasma electrolysis conditions or indeed cavitation, and we have yet another different gas mixture.

So as I see it, we have at least 3 distinctive gas mixture variants that are all very different, but generally (and simply depending on personal preference) given one of these all-encompassing names, Hydroxy, Oxyhydrogen, Brown's gas, Rhodes' gas, Ohmasa gas, HHO, etc. with nothing to distinguish one from the other.

Would be logic then to put water vapor in a tank of HO and see if the torche flame properties change.

Quote from Farrah Day on September 22nd, 2013, 01:29 AM

Again, I'm not convinced by Eckmans Orbital Expansion theory. I think people can be putting a little too much faith in Chris Eckman, after all, apart from the results from the spectrometer, much of what he says is only conjecture. It is well established that water molecules are not all just H2O, but also form molecules such as H3O2 and H5O2, and indeed can form a variety different shaped clusters due to hydrogen bonding. All I am saying is don't take everything on face value.

Also, bear in mind that what Lamare and myself are proposing in terms of the science is open to debate and indeed until proven, is just conjecture.

So, I for one do not believe Brown's Gas to be just oxygen and hydrogen, because quite simply we know that if conditions whereby plasma electrolysis and cavitation can take place, that we get numerous other species being produced. Start pulsing your cells and getting a mineral layer forming and you start to create conditions inducive to plasma electrolysis.

Hey,

There is no doubt from Chris Eckman's  spectrometry that we are still looking at HHO, but he refers to them as "Plasma expanded water" or "electrically expanded water" The reason he chose these names come from the direct experimentation he did with the resulting Brown's gas. One of the important observations he made was the fact that there is an electrical presence when it is combusted. This was due to the fact that when Brown's gas was used to incinerate tungsten it produced tungsten dioxide, something only electricity normally does. Using acetylene did not cause this to occur. There where also other indicators of electrical presence.

While I agree that the overall theory is conjecture we shouldn't be so easy to dismiss it and it's dam good theory. He is after all a Chemistry student who has dedicated much of his time to formulate the theory.

What he also interestingly proposes is that these clusters might represent an n=3 electron orbital state. If this is the case then this definitively proves the presence of zero point energy as the resulting power would be absolutely incredible. I mean we are talking about such massive amounts of energy in one glass of water that could power an entire city for a week. Much in-line with the movie chain reaction if anyone has seen it!

And while it's true that cavitation does produce other species  it does not mean that these are the cause and therefore what we should be investigating, although it is important to keep an open mind about both possibilities.

Quote from Lynx on September 22nd, 2013, 03:17 AM

Point being I think that the cell itself needs some form of semiconductor or dielectric layer of sort or you won't see the Meyer effect at all.
Or as you say something else has to be introduced in the process which totally changes the way the cell works.
Regardless, as a result of these last few days of discussions here I've shifted focus from the electric aspects feeding the cell to the intrinsic physical properties of the cell itself, I think that's where you'll find the secret sauce.

I have to agree, I think there is only so much you can do electrically speaking and there are definitive indications that dielectric layers and intrinsic cell properties may be the place to start investigating. Surely there are better cell designs than plates & tubes...?

Let's find the secret sauce of which you speak :)

Quote from Farrah Day on September 22nd, 2013, 04:05 AM

I used to be in regular email contact with William Rhodes, discussing his findings and the field of electrolysis and WFCs in general, and always found him to be a very decent, down-to-earth guy.

Great to see someone who really get's stuck into research, and the chart is great :D and thanks for the link i'll def be having a read!

Quote from Farrah Day on September 22nd, 2013, 04:05 AM

So as I see it, we have at least 3 distinctive gas mixture variants that are all very different, but generally (and simply depending on personal preference) given one of these all-encompassing names, Hydroxy, Oxyhydrogen, Brown's gas, Rhodes' gas, Ohmasa gas, HHO, etc. with nothing to distinguish one from the other.

What do you propose we can do about this? Can we make some type of chart or other distinction that would enable us to correctly identify what exactly we are referring to?

Quote

What do you propose we can do about this? Can we make some type of chart or other distinction that would enable us to correctly identify what exactly we are referring to?

The logical thing to do is only apply the term Oxyhydrogen or Hydroxy to a stoichiometric volume of pure oxygen and pure hydrogen - something we will never get from our electrolysers.

After that, it's a bit of a free-for-all, as no two electrolysers are likely to produce exactly the same gaseous mix, though the only difference between true hydroxy and the gas mixture produced by a standard DC electrolyser may be the inclusion of water vapour (though even this will vary with different electrolysers - or indeed even the same electrolyser under different conditions).

Quote from zaneaussie on September 22nd, 2013, 06:57 AM

Hey,

There is no doubt from Chris Eckman's  spectrometry that we are still looking at HHO, but he refers to them as "Plasma expanded water" or "electrically expanded water" The reason he chose these names come from the direct experimentation he did with the resulting Brown's gas.

The thing that somewhat concerns me about the peak on Eckmans mass spectrometer graph that he denotes as Plasma Expanded Water, is that it just seems to have far too much mass to be a water molecule with just the addition of an electron or indeed electrons.  

The mass of an electron is so very slight that I would have expected Eckman's so-called Plasma Expanded Water to be indistinguishable from regular water on his graph, but clearly this is not the case.

Eckman states that the twin peaks of diatomic hydrogen and water vapour are due to isotopes of each - that is a discrepancy in neutrons, which are massive compared to an electron. With this in mind it appears that Eckman's Plasma  Expanded Water is far more likely to be an isotope than a plasma.

As you might have gathered, I'm a bit of a stickler for details.

Quote from FaradayEZ on September 21st, 2013, 03:52 PM

I read they have put a gasmixture into a paper bag, left it overnight, the HO disappaded and the heavier brownsgas was left the next morning to play with.

EZ, I assume you meant that the hydrogen dissipated. However, I should point out that oxygen is actually heavier than air.

To be honest I'm a little surprised that a paper bag would be capable of containing any gas overnight.

Quote from Farrah Day on September 23rd, 2013, 04:51 AM

Quote from FaradayEZ on September 21st, 2013, 03:52 PM

I read they have put a gasmixture into a paper bag, left it overnight, the HO disappaded and the heavier brownsgas was left the next morning to play with.

EZ, I assume you meant that the hydrogen dissipated. However, I should point out that oxygen is actually heavier than air.

To be honest I'm a little surprised that a paper bag would be capable of containing any gas overnight.

I guess i meant hydrogen, but if brown's gas is heavier then air, maybe its possible that it stays the night in a paper bag, i don't know, depends on how fast it leaks.
But if it works, or for a shorter time..then still it can be useful. One has to try i guess, as i will try to find where i read it. ;)

edit: (nope no dice, found one that uses paper for purifying:  http://www.rebresearch.com/blog/tag/browns-gas/  )

Quote from Farrah Day on September 22nd, 2013, 08:59 AM

The thing that somewhat concerns me about the peak on Eckmans mass spectrometer graph that he denotes as Plasma Expanded Water, is that it just seems to have far too much mass to be a water molecule with just the addition of an electron or indeed electrons.

It is not just the inclusion of a single electron. The entire structure of the water molecule itself is changed to form a hexagonal cluster of electrons and protons in effect creating a new molecule akin to ice only not.

I made a poor drawing of what I think is taking place



This is where it gets complicated it is essentially
H3o2
But for all intents and purposes it's H2O with an extra H+ or the 4th phase of water... or plasma if you like!

Quote from Farrah Day on September 22nd, 2013, 08:59 AM

With this in mind it appears that Eckman's Plasma  Expanded Water is far more likely to be an isotope than a plasma.

As you might have gathered, I'm a bit of a stickler for details.

That is indeed correct and I believe the only reason that Eckman refers to it as plasma is because of it's electrical properties and molecular arrangement.

18.042 is h2o but added electron or muon or neutrino,not add h+ because mass will be 19.IMHO.

thanks
geenee

Quote from geenee on September 26th, 2013, 08:04 PM

18.042 is h2o but added electron or muon or neutrino,not add h+ because mass will be 19.IMHO.

thanks
geenee

Hey,

Yeah thanks for the correction. I believe this is the water molecule prior to it being made into brown's gas! It must then retain some type of cluster...

So the trick as I see it is that Mother Nature likes to take the path of least resistance and it likes equilibrium.  So how do we facilitate the conditions where this molecule would be the preferred state?  What does this thing like to have?  What makes it happy?

Quote from Matt Watts on September 26th, 2013, 09:12 PM

So the trick as I see it is that Mother Nature likes to take the path of least resistance and it likes equilibrium.  So how do we facilitate the conditions where this molecule would be the preferred state?  What does this thing like to have?  What makes it happy?

That's a very good question! Gerald Pollack seems to think that there are several ways. For one exposing the water to the infrared spectrum seems to precipitate the formation of exclusion zones. Also freezing the water to ice and then thawing also makes these clusters.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnGCMQ8TJ_g

Perhaps exposing the water to a vortex containing a magnetic field and infrared light?

Quote from geenee on September 26th, 2013, 08:04 PM

18.042 is h2o but added electron or muon or neutrino,not add h+ because mass will be 19.IMHO.

thanks
geenee

I think you will find that 18.042 is actually just the second water vapour peak. So what Eckman is describing as Electrically Expanded Water would appear to have an increase in atomic mass of at least one. The addition of a neutron, making it an isotope would achieve this result. As Zane pointed out, so to would the addition of a hydrogen atom (H3O) or a proton (H3O+), but if Eckman is correct in saying it is a plasma, then it would have to be the ion H3O+ (hydronium).

The thing to note, is that in liquid form clusters such as H3O2 are not uncommon, but this in not the gas in Eckman's graph because the extra oxygen atom would increases the mass to 34!

Quote from Farrah Day on September 27th, 2013, 12:59 AM

....but if Eckman is correct in saying it is a plasma, then it would have to be the ion H3O2-.

The thing to note, is that in liquid form H3O2 clusters are not uncommon.

If indeed browns gas comes about as a result of H3O2 clusters in regular water then all we need to do is invent a device that precipitates the formation of those ions so that the water is essentially saturated with them then correct..?

if brown gas has more power than hydrogen then we can use it a little (1lpm)to run a car on water.we need to know how to make it.

not sure about h3o2,atom is complicate not stable like theory.

about h1 gas,mass=1.it is not stable gas.maybe if this is brown gas?another thought.imho.

Quote from geenee on September 27th, 2013, 03:19 AM

if brown gas has more power than hydrogen then we can use it a little (1lpm)to run a car on water.we need to know how to make it.

not sure about h3o2,atom is complicate not stable like theory.

about h1 gas,mass=1.it is not stable gas.maybe if this is brown gas?another thought.imho.

Yes, Brown's gas contains way more energy p/liter than ordinary HHO. The question remains how much?. Chris Eckman does present the equations for working it out but unless you are a chemist then it seems pretty hard to do.

Yeas H3O2 is stable to a degree and this really back's up Eckman's theory where he states the clusters can be stable for up to 15 min.

So, I guess it just becomes a matter of making it on the fly and using it before they break down.

Note guys, I edited my earlier post regarding H3O2 as I realised I was confusing this with the hydronium ion H3O-. H3O2 would of course have an atomic mass of around 34 so be far too massive to be 'Electrically Expanded Water'.

In fact hydronium makes far more sense. It is the correct atomic mass and being an ion it would be a plasma in gaseous state. Also of course it is a species that is prevalent within the water during electrolysis.

Quote from Farrah Day on September 27th, 2013, 04:35 AM

In fact hydronium makes far more sense. It is the correct atomic mass and being an ion it would be a plasma in gaseous state. Also of course it is a species that is prevalent within the water during electrolysis.

Great observation Farrah and that makes perfect sense. How can we go about producing this stuff in abundance..any ideas?

I think this could be an important discovery..if browns gas is indeed hydronium!

Quote from zaneaussie on September 27th, 2013, 04:39 AM

Quote from Farrah Day on September 27th, 2013, 04:35 AM

In fact hydronium makes far more sense. It is the correct atomic mass and being an ion it would be a plasma in gaseous state. Also of course it is a species that is prevalent within the water during electrolysis.

Great observation Farrah and that makes perfect sense. How can we go about producing this stuff in abundance..any ideas?

I think this could be an important discovery..if browns gas is indeed hydronium!

Shouldn't it be H3O+ ?  

Its connecting a proton (H+) to a watermolecule, how would a watermolecule accept that? I think when its had a shock of negativity and a loose H+ is nearby.

Negativity it could feel when the two arms of H+ don't cover it well enough, maybe when they get stretched to 180 degrees or more together. Then there is an area where the kernel doesn't feel their presence and attaches another H+

(atoms are just like little children?..lol)

Quote from FaradayEZ on September 27th, 2013, 06:58 AM

Shouldn't it be H3O+ ?  

Its connecting a proton (H+) to a watermolecule, how would a watermolecule accept that? I think when its had a shock of negativity and a loose H+ is nearby.

Negativity it could feel when the two arms of H+ don't cover it well enough, maybe when they get stretched to 180 degrees or more together. Then there is an area where the kernel doesn't feel their presence and attaches another H+

(atoms are just like little children?..lol)

Ha-ha I am not sure...

The best explanation I could find was this...

/watch?v=TMpys501Tp4

I think we really are entering into unexplored territory...

Also if you believe in aliens and the signal that was supposedly received by SETI there are these weird references to hydronium

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ew-vlNlNLU8

Quote from FaradayEZ on September 27th, 2013, 06:58 AM

Quote from zaneaussie on September 27th, 2013, 04:39 AM

Quote from Farrah Day on September 27th, 2013, 04:35 AM

In fact hydronium makes far more sense. It is the correct atomic mass and being an ion it would be a plasma in gaseous state. Also of course it is a species that is prevalent within the water during electrolysis.

Great observation Farrah and that makes perfect sense. How can we go about producing this stuff in abundance..any ideas?

I think this could be an important discovery..if browns gas is indeed hydronium!

Shouldn't it be H3O+ ?  

Its connecting a proton (H+) to a watermolecule, how would a watermolecule accept that? I think when its had a shock of negativity and a loose H+ is nearby.

Negativity it could feel when the two arms of H+ don't cover it well enough, maybe when they get stretched to 180 degrees or more together. Then there is an area where the kernel doesn't feel their presence and attaches another H+

(atoms are just like little children?..lol)

As long as it does it's job cranking the crankshaft around in my car motor feel free to call it whatever you want.
Like bananamoose.

Quote from Lynx on September 27th, 2013, 07:13 AM

As long as it does it's job cranking the crankshaft around in my car motor feel free to call it whatever you want.
Like bananamoose.

Bananamoose it is then lol :P

Quote from zaneaussie on September 27th, 2013, 07:12 AM

Ha-ha I am not sure...

The best explanation I could find was this...

http:///watch?v=TMpys501Tp4

I think we really are entering into unexplored territory...

Use an acid as the electrolyte maybe and deplete the total electron charge.

Quote from Matt Watts on September 27th, 2013, 07:22 AM

Use an acid as the electrolyte maybe and deplete the total electron charge.

Well it is interesting that the Baghdad battery used a mild acid like vinegar or lemon juice if indeed the Baghdad battery was a battery and not an electrolysis device...