open-source-energy.org

In the video with the bike, i remember somewhere he or the commentator said something like.. "teaching water to burn"

As if it can be imprinted to do so..well..here we can relate to an EZone that teaches the whole cup of water to turn itself into what? H3O2 clustered, and it could go through a carburator and burn in the engine?

And he did make the mix without using power, he just connected two sides.

But what i wanted to say when starting this reply, when working/testing with the EZone, use some coloring in the water, so if a layer grows, one can spot it.

Oh and think about how DNA samples are tested..they run a distance in time over an electrified course, in watery gel?
If one waits long enough they all be at the top of the picture....so with using such a speeddevider..we can choose what (colored water essence) to collect on top..by changing the runtime.

Quote from FaradayEZ on September 29th, 2013, 05:15 AM

In the video with the bike, i remember somewhere he or the commentator said something like.. "teaching water to burn"

As if it can be imprinted to do so..well..here we can relate to an EZone that teaches the whole cup of water to turn itself into what? H3O2 clustered, and it could go through a carburator and burn in the engine?

And he did make the mix without using power, he just connected two sides.

But what i wanted to say when starting this reply, when working/testing with the EZone, use some coloring in the water, so of a layer grows, one can spot it.

tesla gave a clue, he said perhaps we could use salt as a fuel. he is right.
can a proton be considered a particle that is like glue, but never touch?
unless you get a neutron star. is that second particle the same but opposite the proton?

so far you have expel electrons, add or remove protons, ending up with just neutrons. each form a layer of atoms but never touch?:huh:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qg_Fx9iee0c

« Reply #27, on September 29th, 2013, 06:44 AM »

Quote from FaradayEZ on September 29th, 2013, 05:15 AM

In the video with the bike, i remember somewhere he or the commentator said something like.. "teaching water to burn"

Now this is what i'm talking about. It is this exchange of information that leads to new discoveries. I was not aware that comment was made and I think that's exactly what is happening.

Quote from FaradayEZ on September 29th, 2013, 05:15 AM

As if it can be imprinted to do so..well..here we can relate to an EZone that teaches the whole cup of water to turn itself into what? H3O2 clustered, and it could go through a carburator and burn in the engine?

That's exactly right! The water gets saturated with the H3O2 in a lattice structure and is able to be combusted just like regular fuel. There is not even a need to electrolyze it and turn it into an ion in a gaseous form.

Quote from FaradayEZ on September 29th, 2013, 05:15 AM

And he did make the mix without using power, he just connected two sides.

That's exactly right and this is where we need to be paying attention. No power at all. In other words he was using the natural charge attraction between a negative electron and a proton to accomplish this without power, entraining the water as it where.

EZone water is definitively involved here, and if you recall he simply connected or shorted one side of the EZone with the other...does this mean that this shorting caused the protons to migrate to the back of the EZone just like when ice freezes and started the lattice building with the only difference being that the water doesn't actually freeze due to the obvious lack of temperature?

The two fandangle looking aluminum things on the sides I believe are just for show and serve no particular purpose other than to make the device look more complicated than it actually is.

Quote from FaradayEZ on September 29th, 2013, 05:15 AM

But what i wanted to say when starting this reply, when working/testing with the EZone, use some coloring in the water, so if a layer grows, one can spot it.

That's a great idea man! would we just use regular food coloring? or is there some special dye? Also what is the substance Pollack uses to highlight the presence of protons?

Quote from FaradayEZ on September 29th, 2013, 05:15 AM

Oh and think about how DNA samples are tested..they run a distance in time over an electrified course, in watery gel?
If one waits long enough they all be at the top of the picture....so with using such a speeddevider..we can choose what (colored water essence) to collect on top..by changing the runtime.

That sounds really cool, could you explain a little more about how those DNA test's you mentioned are run? I don't fully understand the concept!

Quote from freethisone on September 29th, 2013, 05:29 AM

tesla gave a clue, he said perhaps we could use salt as a fuel. he is right.
can a proton be considered a particle that is like glue, but never touch?
unless you get a neutron star. is that second particle the same but opposite the proton?
so far you have expel electrons, add or remove protons, ending up with just neutrons. each form a layer of atoms but never touch?:huh:

Hey freethisone,

Thanks very much for posting that video. I have however seen it before. I am not sure I fully understand your questions could you possibly re-phrase them? Thanks I am a bit thick sometimes lol

DNA tests..i just guessed that could be a way to do dna testing..

I can't be far off i hope.

So we have to google to be for sure ;)

« Reply #29, on September 29th, 2013, 06:20 PM »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jD10KSeRJAY

the reason for the electron extraction.

but this guy has lots of Stan Myers stuff.

on a quantum level electrons first create a boundary layer, then if you strip them off protons fill the void, then if you strip them off neutrons fill the void.

if you squeeze the boundary layers it the same reaction a star undergoes after it uses all its fuel.

electrons are the easy ones to strip, protons more force is required too remove them from an atom..

the roll salt played is important, it contained metal the salt can be heated by induction. the battery created incredible.

we could probably google concentrated salt battery and find the answer.:cool:

So I spoke to Chris Eckman today and invited him to join our discussion! He is on conference this week but hope he joins us for some great discussions.

A lord Kelvin's thunderstorm separates water into +/-

/watch?v=Cr1w2nTfWYY

Question....is charge separated water EZone water?

How can one body of water be split to create essentially positive water and negative water? To me that's amazing, has anyone run electrolysis experiments on the two types of charged water?

« Reply #31, on September 29th, 2013, 10:20 PM »

Some great dialog going on here, but I haven't yet heard anyone mention "Structured Water".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40lb4FBvJwE

Now this could be complete quackery. I don't know, but it seems related to what we're dealing with here. Dr. Newman claims the molecules of structured water are smaller than distilled water. That may be inaccurate, it could be this water he is talking about is charged and therefore fuses with opposite charged cell receptors.

Just wanted to kick that out there should someone know more about it and better be able to explain the possible relationship with water clusters and hydronium.

Quote from Matt Watts on September 29th, 2013, 10:20 PM

Some great dialog going on here, but I haven't yet heard anyone mention "Structured Water".

There sure is Matt :) There really is some great dialog and I hope it continues.

With regards to structured water, it has been around for some time and there are people who have both spoken about and made videos like the one you posted. The Russians have done a great deal of research on this subject, and lots of people make "magnetic" water etc. It has been known that using structured water to water plants with has increased crop yield and crop size but up until now western science has dismissed these claims as hodgepodge.

It is really only Gerard Pollack who has come out with some real laboratory science that actually prove the existence of structured water, and we can now say hey this stuff is actually made of H3O2...and what do you know water is in fact much more complex than what anyone has ever anticipated.

Quote from Matt Watts on September 29th, 2013, 10:20 PM

Now this could be complete quackery. I don't know, but it seems related to what we're dealing with here. Dr. Newman claims the molecules of structured water are smaller than distilled water. That may be inaccurate, it could be this water he is talking about is charged and therefore fuses with opposite charged cell receptors.

Yeah I really don't know how you could make that claim, what is the evidence that the molecules are in fact smaller? Everything we have heard about so far from Eckman and Pollack seems to indicate the opposite because it becomes a cluster rather than a separated particle.

Quote from Matt Watts on September 29th, 2013, 10:20 PM

Just wanted to kick that out there should someone know more about it and better be able to explain the possible relationship with water clusters and hydronium.

Yeah I am hoping we could get a little more scientific information and was able to contact Chris Eckman..I hope he comes and joins us for some debates. In the meantime we can all contribute what we think is relevant in terms of information, theories, experiments and ideas etc

Quote from freethisone on September 29th, 2013, 06:20 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jD10KSeRJAY

the reason for the electron extraction.

but this guy has lots of Stan Myers stuff.

on a quantum level electrons first create a boundary layer, then if you strip them off protons fill the void, then if you strip them off neutrons fill the void.

if you squeeze the boundary layers it the same reaction a star undergoes after it uses all its fuel.

electrons are the easy ones to strip, protons more force is required too remove them from an atom..

the roll salt played is important, it contained metal the salt can be heated by induction. the battery created incredible.

we could probably google concentrated salt battery and find the answer.:cool:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-x3PVi8wF0

good work to Tony Woodside. :s If tony is here Hi..

« Reply #34, on September 30th, 2013, 08:42 PM »

Something to consider:
http://open-source-energy.org/?tid=659&pid=19095#pid19095

Could it be so simple?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgpcBRbnyTE&list=UU1fmWjG_sIIyAAt3_KDMGmQ

a steam thingamajig..:huh:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbk5PCZ_7T4&list=UU1fmWjG_sIIyAAt3_KDMGmQ

cool any electricians recognize the sound?
is there a bias.?:huh:

Quote from Matt Watts on September 30th, 2013, 08:42 PM

Something to consider:
http://open-source-energy.org/?tid=659&pid=19095#pid19095
Could it be so simple?

Hey Matt,

Are you referring to a particular post? I'm not sure I follow...

Quote from freethisone on September 30th, 2013, 10:55 PM

a steam thingamajig..:huh:

Yeah pretty cool! I wasn't aware that there was a steam thingamajig either!!! Thanks for posting!

Quote from freethisone on September 30th, 2013, 10:55 PM

cool any electricians recognize the sound?
is there a bias.?:huh:

Hmm it almost sounds like a bloody echo sounding submarine or sooooommmme kkkoooiiinnd of aaaaaallliiieeen signal :p

So this is what Stan Meyers WFC sounds like..cool!!!

/watch?v=xKXbTJsnH-s

« Reply #37, on October 1st, 2013, 11:41 AM »

Quote from zaneaussie on October 1st, 2013, 03:00 AM

Quote from Matt Watts on September 30th, 2013, 08:42 PM
Something to consider:
http://open-source-energy.org/?tid=659&pid=19095#pid19095
Could it be so simple?
Hey Matt,

Are you referring to a particular post? I'm not sure I follow...

Yes, my last one in the NGE Popper thread. A correlation between this research and the Papp engine. It's the water; been there right under our nose the whole time.

« Reply #38, on October 1st, 2013, 12:39 PM »

Quote from Matt Watts on October 1st, 2013, 11:41 AM

Quote from zaneaussie on October 1st, 2013, 03:00 AM
Quote from Matt Watts on September 30th, 2013, 08:42 PM
Something to consider:
http://open-source-energy.org/?tid=659&pid=19095#pid19095
Could it be so simple?
Hey Matt,

Are you referring to a particular post? I'm not sure I follow...
Yes, my last one in the NGE Popper thread. A correlation between this research and the Papp engine. It's the water; been there right under our nose the whole time.

It looks like the link doesn't work yet, the posts in the popper thread are lacking behind or so.. :(

Quote from FaradayEZ on October 1st, 2013, 12:39 PM

It looks like the link doesn't work yet, the posts in the popper thread are lacking behind or so.. :(

How about this one:
http://open-source-energy.org/?tid=659&pid=19095

For some reason my pagination is all different from the defaults even though I have set everything back to normal.

Screw it, I'll just repost:

Not too much here to go on, but it may be a clue someone can zero in on:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfhGtwr0C58

Step to 14:46

add useful files;brown gas.

Quote from Matt Watts on October 1st, 2013, 01:09 PM

Screw it, I'll just repost:

Not too much here to go on, but it may be a clue someone can zero in on:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfhGtwr0C58

Step to 14:46

Very nice post Matt! and also very interesting! A Ppapp engine with water instead of gas.....def food for thought!

Quote from geenee on October 1st, 2013, 04:56 PM

add useful files;brown gas.

Very nice mate! Thanks for the post and great to see exactly this kind of info!!!

Quote from zaneaussie on September 30th, 2013, 01:12 AM

There sure is Matt :) There really is some great dialog and I hope it continues.

With regards to structured water, it has been around for some time and there are people who have both spoken about and made videos like the one you posted. The Russians have done a great deal of research on this subject, and lots of people make "magnetic" water etc. It has been known that using structured water to water plants with has increased crop yield and crop size but up until now western science has dismissed these claims as hodgepodge.

It is really only Gerard Pollack who has come out with some real laboratory science that actually prove the existence of structured water, and we can now say hey this stuff is actually made of H3O2...and what do you know water is in fact much more complex than what anyone has ever anticipated.

Yeah I really don't know how you could make that claim, what is the evidence that the molecules are in fact smaller? Everything we have heard about so far from Eckman and Pollack seems to indicate the opposite because it becomes a cluster rather than a separated particle.

Yeah I am hoping we could get a little more scientific information and was able to contact Chris Eckman..I hope he comes and joins us for some debates. In the meantime we can all contribute what we think is relevant in terms of information, theories, experiments and ideas etc