Quote from Amsy on June 28th, 2012, 10:46 PM

Quote from Faisca on June 28th, 2012, 04:20 PM

Quote from Amsy on June 28th, 2012, 11:16 AM

Quote from Faisca on June 28th, 2012, 08:37 AM

Quote from Amsy on June 26th, 2012, 09:50 AM

Do we exactly know if all inductivities in the VIC are working in the same direction?
Because, you are right, it would make no sense to seperate the inductivites to three coils working in the same direction.
In Stan´s Memo the direction of the wrapping of the coils are drawed on the magnetic core. I studied them very long, coming allways to the same result:
The main secondary and the Charging Choke 1 are wrapped in the same direction. The Charging Choke 2 is wrapped in the other direction to the two other chokes. Can someone confirm this drawing of the wrap-directions?
Also I made very interesting tests with different wrapped coil pairs. That was the reason, why I could achive 1,5kV on the coils and a strong electric field in the WFC.

Attachment 1: simplified VIC
Attachment 2: schematic of test (1,5kV), direction of coil wrapping

Amsy, the more we look at this circuit, looks more like a decoy. These chokes are not chokes, are secondary, and are opposite, subtract, as you proved (1500-1500 = 0) ..... for what? this makes no sense in the real world.
Do you think the government would commit this error, and compromise "national security" of the mafia. Sorry, but you must be very naive.
All this information so easily available, has an obvious purpose, to expose Mr.. Meyer WFC as a fraud and a fantasy. Again, here there was manipulation, such as the "magic bullet" (murder of Kenedit), or "against Iran," or "Vietnam" or "Gulf" or "9-11 wtc" (pancake effect) and very more. And just the fact that they had all this care to screen, increases the belief that Meyer made ​​real.

lol, the topics you liste have nothing to do with patents and testing evaluations... also it is not comparable with such events...

The cancelling of the voltage inhibit the current through the water. The C in the WFC will load on the supplyvoltage of the secondary. A I said, normal electrotechnical laws...
How was it possible to measure a high voltage field in the tube and in the near of the tube in my test? Teach me...

That is the basic for ionisation.... so the information of meyer is coherent to this point. And yes, every atom or molecule can be ionised. The further step is, that a liberated electron can hit another molecule on the way to the electrode and ionise this one.... think about particle physics and cold plasma.

You and I can believe what we want, but don´t call me naive...

sorry was no intention of offense, just wanted to say "that need to be very naive to ..." (all of us, not you specifically).
Everything I listed, is all about (inventors, scientists, etc., being suppressed by corporate interests).
But back to the subject; high tension without amp? only if the resistance is infinite (or almost). Would be the case of a capacitor and not the cell with tap water.
You insists that got high tension in your test, this is not true. What you saw was in relation to the ground, not between the poles, I'm sure, who should be the same potential.
Tests on a cell with gap = 1.2mm show:
voltage <1V, I got an amp = 15 to 100uA and end of the graph, with voltage> 10V, I got an amp = 100 to 900mA.
This infers that resistance begins in dozens of K-ohms and ends with tens of ohms.

Hi faisca,
No prob. Looks like a language barriere. :D

No, in my test, the "infinte resistance" is no infinite resistance, it is a counter-voltage in the second coil (1,5kV-1,5kV). So the current from the first to the second coil is very small.
Like if you put two full loaded batteries in parallel (+ on +). If the voltage is even, no current will flow. So in my test then when having the same inductivity value, and the induced voltage is even, also no current will flow.  

So in my WFC I only can measure 0,7Volt Voltagedrop. But thats not the problem, because, the C in the WFC will charge on the 1,5kV of the first Coil. The second coils voltage have no influence on C because of the diode.
We have to difference "voltage drop" and "working voltage on C". If you ever measure a voltage over WFC it will be a voltage drop because of the dominating waterresistance.

Of course I measured against a ground, but that say, that the voltagefield on one of the tubes is produced in the WFC. The -electrode of the WFC can only be 0Volt, because of the Diode. No loading current can flow to -C.
I also could measure the voltage field between the cables (and only between them) to the WFC with the phase-tester, without touching the phase tester (neon lamp light was on and strong).

I read about that phenomenon of my test in the "test evaluation report". (Attachment 1, Page 66 beginning)
The voltage drop over the WFC was very tiny in the replication.

http://globalkast.com/docs/International%20Independent%20Test%20Evaluation%20Report.pdf

Then you realize what you're saying?
Even if you used a real capacitor, instead of the cell, do not build up tension, because there is no!
I also did this same test, with almost 3kV, I could light a fluorescent bulb, without touching the poles of the cell, but it serves no purpose because there was no difference in potential between the poles, no larger than 1V. (like you saw)
Yesterday I did a test and got 25V on the cell, at a cost of 450mA, but it was not tap water, used water from the drain of the air conditioner (one that is condensed from the air).
By measuring cell I, found capacitance of 800uF until 1200UF (two types of water), since the test voltage, is in the range of tens of mV.
The equivalent of a cell would be a great polarized capacitor and a resistor in parallel with dynamic, nonlinear resistance inversely proportional to the voltage.
For 1V ---> R = > 1k.
For 100V ---> R = <1
What do you think?
Ah .. I could not see the document.

Quote from Faisca on June 29th, 2012, 08:54 AM

Then you realize what you're saying?
Even if you used a real capacitor, instead of the cell, do not build up tension, because there is no!
I also did this same test, with almost 3kV, I could light a fluorescent bulb, without touching the poles of the cell, but it serves no purpose because there was no difference in potential between the poles, no larger than 1V. (like you saw)
Yesterday I did a test and got 25V on the cell, at a cost of 450mA, but it was not tap water, used water from the drain of the air conditioner (one that is condensed from the air).
By measuring cell I, found capacitance of 800uF until 1200UF (two types of water), since the test voltage, is in the range of tens of mV.
The equivalent of a cell would be a great polarized capacitor and a resistor in parallel with dynamic, nonlinear resistance inversely proportional to the voltage.
For 1V ---> R = > 1k.
For 100V ---> R = <1
What do you think?
Ah .. I could not see the document.

As I said, the bulb lights also without the WFC between the supplycables which are normally connected to the wfc. If both cables would have the same voltage, would the untouched neon bulb light between them?
If both charging chokes had not a different voltage, why it makes a "dead short" to my coils? The insulation burned @1,7kV. Such a processes needs a high potential-difference to burn insulations.

The funny thing is, that when I measured the 1,5kV over the coils, the supplycables voltage without the connected WFC was 0V. With the WFC 0,7Volts voltagedrop.

A neon lamp has to be ionised to work (Ionisation needs a voltage field). That is a proof, that a voltage field exists (between the cables=between the tubes).
Then it makes no difference if you put in a neon gas or water, both can be ionised. Water will need more thatn 10kV I think and the current have to be blocked to inhibit electrolyses.

If you measure a voltage over the WFC or the neon lamp, it is only a voltage drop, which consume power.

In all Stanley Meyer circuits we find coils which have this strange wrapping. So that the second charging choke can cancel the voltage of the first charging choke.

Why do you can´t open the file? Do you have "Acrobat reader"?
If yes, than try right-click-->save as...it would be important, because the assayer who replicate meyers coil/WFC aragment report about the little voltagedrop on the WFC and also about the stepwise loading....

Quote from Amsy on June 29th, 2012, 11:01 AM

As I said, the bulb lights also without the WFC between the supplycables which are normally connected to the wfc. If both cables would have the same voltage, would the untouched neon bulb light between them?
If both charging chokes had not a different voltage, why it makes a "dead short" to my coils? The insulation burned @1,7kV. Such a processes needs a high potential-difference to burn insulations.

The funny thing is, that when I measured the 1,5kV over the coils, the supplycables voltage without the connected WFC was 0V. With the WFC 0,7Volts voltagedrop.

A neon lamp has to be ionised to work (Ionisation needs a voltage field). That is a proof, that a voltage field exists (between the cables=between the tubes).
Then it makes no difference if you put in a neon gas or water, both can be ionised. Water will need more thatn 10kV I think and the current have to be blocked to inhibit electrolyses.

If you measure a voltage over the WFC or the neon lamp, it is only a voltage drop, which consume power.

In all Stanley Meyer circuits we find coils which have this strange wrapping. So that the second charging choke can cancel the voltage of the first charging choke.

Why do you can´t open the file? Do you have "Acrobat reader"?
If yes, than try right-click-->save as...it would be important, because the assayer who replicate meyers coil/WFC aragment report about the little voltagedrop on the WFC and also about the stepwise loading....

Whenever testing a secondary and 2 choke configuration please take into account that the EEC parallel to the upper choke can short out the upper choke. so the EEC becomes some kind of dynamic regulator for the 3 coil configuration.

VIC CORE ACT LIKE Alternator,1 pri 1sec 1 feedback 2 chokes all in the same U core.

positive charge is positive plate,dielectric insulator of water capacitor is oxide layer,negative charge is water.

All of this like charging capacitor with all voltage source when off time energy from 2 charge(pos+neg) will discharge to water(Resistance element),high amps discharge on this time shortly,but distance between of pos + neg side is extreme low distance(nano meter,micro meter) it cause low heat.

SEE RESULT,this video test tap water with coating and electrolyte with coating.voltage source is radiant charger(not VIC).
 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrLczxYg74I

thanks
 
geenee    

Quote from geenee on June 30th, 2012, 08:48 AM

VIC CORE ACT LIKE Alternator,1 pri 1sec 1 feedback 2 chokes all in the same U core.

positive charge is positive plate,dielectric insulator of water capacitor is oxide layer,negative charge is water.

All of this like charging capacitor with all voltage source when off time energy from 2 charge(pos+neg) will discharge to water(Resistance element),high amps discharge on this time shortly,but distance between of pos + neg side is extreme low distance(nano meter,micro meter) it cause low heat.

SEE RESULT,this video test tap water with coating and electrolyte with coating.voltage is radiant charger(not VIC).
 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrLczxYg74I

thanks
 
geenee

Hy,

so you mean the waterbath is the electrical ground? And both electrodes charge with same high voltage? Good idea I think. Because in that case electrolyses can not be performed and ionisation could be realized. Look at the attachment, Meyer draws in one circuit your idea! He described the water bath as electrical ground.  

Maybe this is also performed in the VIC... (attachment 2)
Important is, that also in that case, the amps would be very tiny, so voltage can rise on the secondary..

For the alternator setup a pulsed signal on the field rotation would be necessary, because of magnetic field collaps to rise the voltage. Right?

That would be the reason why only measured so tiny Voltage over the WFC + and - .  
So this means we have to measure against "earth ground" with the osci to see the real voltage on the +WFC and also over the - WFC? That would be the reason for that voltage diagramm on the side of the attachments.

Good explained,Amsy.i think so.but i'm not sure,i will test more to proof that.

you look at this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrLczxYg74I (youtube's user = supermuble)  already?

what do you think?
-when use electrolyte,frequency is drop,production is lower than tap water only.he had coating plates(pos,neg, neutral) with oxide layer(i dont know type of that).

Quote from geenee on June 27th, 2012, 12:35 PM

now i think about"Why he give wrong information?"

EX. VIC U CORE it act likely Alternator?why he don't talk the true? it easy to understand.
EX. Many explained from paper, video (Misinformation,Misleading,wrong theory,many wrong word).IS MISTAKE?OR TRICK to keep secret from replicator?he is a businessman.businessman want to rich.

i believe "Meyer's car can run on water".But i don't believe "Meyer is honest".


if we need to success WFC then we shouldn't trust somethings from Meyer's word.and go ahead in real theory ,think about real equipment from Meyer, reference patents from other or other real waterpower guys,like "Puharich,Stephen Horvarths,Daniel Dingel".

now i will think differences. and go ahead.

maybe secret is steam water burning???by less HHO burning because hard to make more hho in low power consumption.

geenee

steam water burning that i said,i found from http://www.energeticforum.com(Aaron Murakami).i think "This is a secret of Meyer's tech,plasma spark plug(in another words is WFC INJECTOR SYSTEM)". Car can run By steam water(from steam resonator) go to WFC injector then plasma flames ignition will work,this's main power.resonant cavity produce HHO but not enough for run a car,steam water from steam resonator is more(maybe 70-90% is plasma ignition steam water,10-30% is HHO from resonant cavity).  

thanks
geenee  

Quote from geenee on June 30th, 2012, 04:19 PM

Good explained,Amsy.i think so.but i'm not sure,i will test more to proof that.

you look at this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrLczxYg74I (youtube's user = supermuble)  already?

what do you think?
-when use electrolyte,frequency is drop,production is lower than tap water only.he had coating plates(pos,neg, neutral) with oxide layer(i dont know type of that).

Quote from geenee on June 27th, 2012, 12:35 PM

now i think about"Why he give wrong information?"

EX. VIC U CORE it act likely Alternator?why he don't talk the true? it easy to understand.
EX. Many explained from paper, video (Misinformation,Misleading,wrong theory,many wrong word).IS MISTAKE?OR TRICK to keep secret from replicator?he is a businessman.businessman want to rich.

i believe "Meyer's car can run on water".But i don't believe "Meyer is honest".


if we need to success WFC then we shouldn't trust somethings from Meyer's word.and go ahead in real theory ,think about real equipment from Meyer, reference patents from other or other real waterpower guys,like "Puharich,Stephen Horvarths,Daniel Dingel".

now i will think differences. and go ahead.

maybe secret is steam water burning???by less HHO burning because hard to make more hho in low power consumption.

geenee

steam water burning that i said,i found from http://www.energeticforum.com(Aaron Murakami).i think "This is a secret of Meyer's tech,plasma spark plug(in another words is WFC INJECTOR SYSTEM)". Car can run By steam water(from steam resonator) go to WFC injector then plasma flames ignition will work,this's main power.resonant cavity produce HHO but not enough for run a car,steam water from steam resonator is more(maybe 70-90% is plasma ignition steam water,10-30% is HHO from resonant cavity).  

thanks
geenee

Yes I watched the video. Very interessting indeed. Specially the gas production with and without electrolyte. The neutral plates produce gas without the electrolyte...it would be interesting, what voltage he had between the + and one neutral plate.


IMHO, the watercar of meyer had several hardware in it. The combination of all of the stuff leads to the functional water car. Also the steam resonator and the hydrogen gun (LED Light)....but thats a other topic.


So if we look at the waterbath or the nuertral plates as electrical ground, what will happen?

Normaly if we put in voltage on one of the tubes/plates, the ions in the water (because of pollution) will start electrolyses if there would be a real electrical ground on the second tube/plate. (closed loop circuit)
So the second tube/plate has to stop the current to inhibit electrolyses. This would be made with the counter-voltage formed by the secondary charging choke which is equal in the amplitude of the first charging choke. (attachment osci shot in meyer´s schematic)
So no potential difference can happen on the wfc tubes/plates. But we have a real high potential difference between the "earth ground (water or neutral plate)" and the two tubes.

Look at the attachment, the osci shots of meyer were made against "earth ground". Not directly over the wfc!! Thats a important point, because we all measure over the WFCs tubes and wondering why it is not working.
We would measure ~0V if both charging chokes have the same amount of inductivity and supply the same voltage amplitude. (finetuning the amplitude of hte secondary charging choke, so no current can flow)

So the water can be splittet by ionization by pulling out electrons of the molecul. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionization (The water would be a electron source=Electron extraction circuit in the patent).
The molekul would be destabilzed and can break up the bonding. Also the free electrons can ionize an other molecul again. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avalanche_effect_%28electronics%29

i attached a picture of flux line VIC.

Notice only secondary choke is not the same flux line.

why?

thanks
geenee

Quote from geenee on July 2nd, 2012, 01:11 PM

i attached a picture of flux line VIC.

Notice only secondary choke is not the same flux line.

why?

thanks
geenee

Yes you are basically right and you pointed it out!! :) There is something not-ordinary going on in the secondary charging choke.

Want to add something:
The flux lines in the core will all be the same I think. The direction is given by the primary coil which induce the magnetic field. The other coils can only pick up this magnetic field.
Also I think magnetic fields can not have different directions in one core generally. But thats not so important.

Important is, the main secondary and the charging chokes "pick up" the magnetic field and generate a voltage with different prefix (+ & -) because of different wrapping directions.
The first charging choke generate a +Voltage and the second charging choke will generate a -Voltage (like the drawn voltage diagramms in the attachment of the pre-post) with the same amplitude.
So voltages will cancel in the WFC-->no current can flow and the voltage measured at B+ and B- is nearly 0V. That is the reason why the second charging choke is wrapped in other direction related to the first one.
By canceling the current, it is possible to rise each voltage-amplitude to a very high level, like in a spark plug.
The "ground" of the circuit is the water, or a neutral plate inside the water like in the drawing of Stanley Meyer.

All other topologies would only release normal electrolyses. For example: All wrapping directions are the same, than the VIC would work as a normal transformer´s secondary, which would be shorted out by the electrolyses process in the water because of the tiny resistance of water.

Quote from Amsy on July 2nd, 2012, 11:51 PM

Quote from geenee on July 2nd, 2012, 01:11 PM

i attached a picture of flux line VIC.

Notice only secondary choke is not the same flux line.

why?

thanks
geenee

Yes you are basically right and you pointed it out!! :) There is something not-ordinary going on in the secondary charging choke.

Want to add something:
The flux lines in the core will all be the same I think. The direction is given by the primary coil which induce the magnetic field. The other coils can only pick up this magnetic field.
Also I think magnetic fields can not have different directions in one core generally. But thats not so important.

Important is, the main secondary and the charging chokes "pick up" the magnetic field and generate a voltage with different prefix (+ & -) because of different wrapping directions.
The first charging choke generate a +Voltage and the second charging choke will generate a -Voltage (like the drawn voltage diagramms in the attachment of the pre-post) with the same amplitude.
So voltages will cancel in the WFC-->no current can flow and the voltage measured at B+ and B- is nearly 0V. That is the reason why the second charging choke is wrapped in other direction related to the first one.
By canceling the current, it is possible to rise each voltage-amplitude to a very high level, like in a spark plug.
The "ground" of the circuit is the water, or a neutral plate inside the water like in the drawing of Stanley Meyer.

All other topologies would only release normal electrolyses. For example: All wrapping directions are the same, than the VIC would work as a normal transformer´s secondary, which would be shorted out by the electrolyses process in the water because of the tiny resistance of water.

anyway. there is an error in this sum, if a choke is +1.5 kV and another -1.5 kV, the result is zero, but lacked an element .... the "secondary".
Another important point: "chokes" are secondary because they are in the same nucleus. And if not current flows, there is no load on chokes and they do not react.
I'm wondering if there is no one way to apply positive and negative at different times with the open loop (just a thought).

Quote from Faisca on July 3rd, 2012, 07:15 AM

Quote from Amsy on July 2nd, 2012, 11:51 PM

Quote from geenee on July 2nd, 2012, 01:11 PM

i attached a picture of flux line VIC.

Notice only secondary choke is not the same flux line.

why?

thanks
geenee

Yes you are basically right and you pointed it out!! :) There is something not-ordinary going on in the secondary charging choke.

Want to add something:
The flux lines in the core will all be the same I think. The direction is given by the primary coil which induce the magnetic field. The other coils can only pick up this magnetic field.
Also I think magnetic fields can not have different directions in one core generally. But thats not so important.

Important is, the main secondary and the charging chokes "pick up" the magnetic field and generate a voltage with different prefix (+ & -) because of different wrapping directions.
The first charging choke generate a +Voltage and the second charging choke will generate a -Voltage (like the drawn voltage diagramms in the attachment of the pre-post) with the same amplitude.
So voltages will cancel in the WFC-->no current can flow and the voltage measured at B+ and B- is nearly 0V. That is the reason why the second charging choke is wrapped in other direction related to the first one.
By canceling the current, it is possible to rise each voltage-amplitude to a very high level, like in a spark plug.
The "ground" of the circuit is the water, or a neutral plate inside the water like in the drawing of Stanley Meyer.

All other topologies would only release normal electrolyses. For example: All wrapping directions are the same, than the VIC would work as a normal transformer´s secondary, which would be shorted out by the electrolyses process in the water because of the tiny resistance of water.

anyway. there is an error in this sum, if a choke is +1.5 kV and another -1.5 kV, the result is zero, but lacked an element .... the "secondary".
Another important point: "chokes" are secondary because they are in the same nucleus. And if not current flows, there is no load on chokes and they do not react.
I'm wondering if there is no one way to apply positive and negative at different times with the open loop (just a thought).

Remember that the 1,5kV was in my test, I had no main secondary choke, only two charging chokes. So the sum was 0Volt over the WFC.

The shown VIC with the three coil on the secondary is just an idea, how it can work, because the advantage of the VIC is, that the air gaps are adjustable, and the voltage can be adjusted to 0V over the WFC, what means we can "tune-in to resonance" (not the frequency based) like meyer would say. His resonant state means that nearly no current is flowing and the voltage is on highest level of amplitude.

The current you thinking of is on the primary side. Not on the secondary. The chokes voltage is beeing produced with inductance of the primary to the magnetic core. Normal transformation process. No current on the secondary needed we have already a magnetic flux in the core.

Quote from Amsy on July 3rd, 2012, 08:01 AM

Quote from Faisca on July 3rd, 2012, 07:15 AM

Quote from Amsy on July 2nd, 2012, 11:51 PM

Quote from geenee on July 2nd, 2012, 01:11 PM

i attached a picture of flux line VIC.

Notice only secondary choke is not the same flux line.

why?

thanks
geenee

Yes you are basically right and you pointed it out!! :) There is something not-ordinary going on in the secondary charging choke.

Want to add something:
The flux lines in the core will all be the same I think. The direction is given by the primary coil which induce the magnetic field. The other coils can only pick up this magnetic field.
Also I think magnetic fields can not have different directions in one core generally. But thats not so important.

Important is, the main secondary and the charging chokes "pick up" the magnetic field and generate a voltage with different prefix (+ & -) because of different wrapping directions.
The first charging choke generate a +Voltage and the second charging choke will generate a -Voltage (like the drawn voltage diagramms in the attachment of the pre-post) with the same amplitude.
So voltages will cancel in the WFC-->no current can flow and the voltage measured at B+ and B- is nearly 0V. That is the reason why the second charging choke is wrapped in other direction related to the first one.
By canceling the current, it is possible to rise each voltage-amplitude to a very high level, like in a spark plug.
The "ground" of the circuit is the water, or a neutral plate inside the water like in the drawing of Stanley Meyer.

All other topologies would only release normal electrolyses. For example: All wrapping directions are the same, than the VIC would work as a normal transformer´s secondary, which would be shorted out by the electrolyses process in the water because of the tiny resistance of water.

anyway. there is an error in this sum, if a choke is +1.5 kV and another -1.5 kV, the result is zero, but lacked an element .... the "secondary".
Another important point: "chokes" are secondary because they are in the same nucleus. And if not current flows, there is no load on chokes and they do not react.
I'm wondering if there is no one way to apply positive and negative at different times with the open loop (just a thought).

Remember that the 1,5kV was in my test, I had no main secondary choke, only two charging chokes. So the sum was 0Volt over the WFC.

The shown VIC with the three coil on the secondary is just an idea, how it can work, because the advantage of the VIC is, that the air gaps are adjustable, and the voltage can be adjusted to 0V over the WFC, what means we can "tune-in to resonance" (not the frequency based) like meyer would say. His resonant state means that nearly no current is flowing and the voltage is on highest level of amplitude.

The current you thinking of is on the primary side. Not on the secondary. The chokes voltage is beeing produced with inductance of the primary to the magnetic core. Normal transformation process. No current on the secondary needed we have already a magnetic flux in the core.

yes exactly, the magnetic flux in the core, then we have three secondary, and the turns ratio, very close. Therefore: 1 +1-1 = 1, or 1-1-1 = -1. There are always differences.

yes, you're right all.i add some observation.

-first, primary induce all 3 coils to secondary coils(because it's on the same u core,same flux line),but shift phase a little.then like Amsy said "on 2 exciter plates will be positive all(flux from primary induce 2nd choke to have current then exciter plate of 2nd choke  become to positive)".

-second, secondary resonant choke has current from main secondary>diode>first choke>water(low resistance)>2nd choke then 2nd choke will be induced to opposite flux from primary,now exciter plate of 2nd choke it become to negative.

****Exciter plate from 2nd choke is induced 2 polar(B+&B-) in the same time?????? this is restrict amps flow???

just thought

geenee

Hi folks,

Quote

yes exactly, the magnetic flux in the core, then we have three secondary, and the turns ratio, very close. Therefore: 1 +1-1 = 1, or 1-1-1 = -1. There are always differences.

Yes that is right. But only if it would be a one core solution. But we know because of pix which where made of the VIC, that it is possible to adjust an air gap because of the two "U" - Profiles. (Attachment 1 and 2)
Which also means, we can adjust the inductivity of the coils. Then maybe it is possible to get 0,5+0,5-1=0. But I cann´t try this, because I have no original VIC to test.

Quote

yes, you're right all.i add some observation.

-first, primary induce all 3 coils to secondary coils(because it's on the same u core,same flux line),but shift phase a little.then like Amsy said "on 2 exciter plates will be positive all(flux from primary induce 2nd choke to have current then exciter plate of 2nd choke become to positive)".

-second, secondary resonant choke has current from main secondary>diode>first choke>water(low resistance)>2nd choke then 2nd choke will be induced to opposite flux from primary,now exciter plate of 2nd choke it become to negative.

****Exciter plate from 2nd choke is induced 2 polar(B+&B-) in the same time?????? this is restrict amps flow???

just thought

The amp flow is restricted because the amplitude of the B+ is the same as the B- --> No Potential difference = no current.
The B+ Amplitude is built with the Secondary Main and the first charging choke.
The B- Amplitude is built with the second charging choke.
B+  +  B- = 0V  , (Attachment 3 - red mark)
[like we would have two exactly same voltage sources. (Imagine two Batteries, both fully loaded->connect    + with +    and     - with -  , no current is flowing when both have the exactly same voltage level)].


So to finetune exactly to the same voltage, some kind of option for adjusting has to be installed-->maybe air gap.

Would we measure 1V or something over B+ and B-, the amplitude is not the same and the we have potential difference = current.

Imagine: When we would have 0V measured at B+ and B- means no potential difference=no current can flow through the water (no electrolyses).
Would we measure B+ or B- against a real ground the same voltage amplitude would be measured (can be very high like at spark plugs, because no energy is wasted in current).
The ground can also be water, maybe.
 

i think "need more test",if you right.

easy way to test is "2ea ignition coils(same output value), 2ea 20KV diode, 2 plates(already conditioning with oxide layer)".

2 positive sides attached,no potential difference,water is ground(electron source),oxide layer is insulator.

if someone test this, please post here.

thanks
geenee

Quote from geenee on July 4th, 2012, 11:20 AM

i think "need more test",if you right.

easy way to test is "2ea ignition coils(same value output), 2ea 20KV diode, 2 plates(already conditioning with oxide layer)".

2 positive sides attached,no potential difference,water is ground(electron source),oxide layer is insulator.

if someone test this, please post here.

thanks
geenee

Please give a brief drawing. (can be done by hand on paper, and picked up by the digital camera (web cam, scanner or mobile)
The schematic diagram is a universal language.

Quote from Faisca on July 4th, 2012, 12:27 PM

Quote from geenee on July 4th, 2012, 11:20 AM

i think "need more test",if you right.

easy way to test is "2ea ignition coils(same value output), 2ea 20KV diode, 2 plates(already conditioning with oxide layer)".

2 positive sides attached,no potential difference,water is ground(electron source),oxide layer is insulator.

if someone test this, please post here.

thanks
geenee

Please give a brief drawing. (can be done by hand on paper, and picked up by the digital camera (web cam, scanner or mobile)
The schematic diagram is a universal language.

-20kv diode can make by 1n4007(20ea) and join them in series.
-conditioning plates by electrolyte process(see how to  on wiki link below), use aluminum neg plate and stainless steel pos plate.then after finish use stainless steel plate to be exciter plate.

about oxide layer
-Aluminium oxide 9.34 ε0 at 25 °C
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium_oxide_(data_page)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrolytic_capacitor
-IRON OXIDE dielectric constant 14.2
http://www.asiinstr.com/technical/Dielectric%20Constants.htm

thanks
geenee

Hi folks,

I don´t know if it is right. Just an idea. :) But that process needs nearly no current! (measured it in test).  
But yes, we can try this. I think the hardest "part" is to find very equal ignition coils. So that they form no potential difference.
Can the diodes in the drawing handle this, that no current is flowing?

Maybe the gap distance is an important part of the exciter plates or tubes. Stanley Meyer noticed that (don´t know if it is true). This setup looks a little bit on what faisca is researching on. Maybe you can give some good advice with the gap distance :)

I think the important part is, that the ground of the water (electrode or basin) is not connected with the ground of the ignition coil. (Attachment) to inhibit electrolyses.

I don´t know exactly, but will an oxide Layer lower the voltage which is "performing" on the watermolecul? Or still the same "force" on the watermolecule. (thinking of capacitys in serial connection)

I read again the memo of meyer, where he describted this B+ and B- voltage and the diagramm I have shown, to be sure, that we understand the apparatus drawing. So it is like we thought, that the two voltages are canceling out and the voltage measured over ground (water) is high. Also he describted the "fine tuning" of the voltage, that both have to be the same.
Maybe we are on the right way with the idea! :)



 

-HV Diode i found on wiki easy make HV Diode by use simple diode 1n4007(1000V,1A) many pieces and series soldering.it can handle this voltage(1000V*20=20000V,1A).

-High voltage source is hard to make same voltage.Other HV source... i have no idea....need help about this!!!

-about distance between gap.this like electrolyte process(thin gap high production)??? if insulator is pure water(100%pure) gap is importance because water is a huge of dielectric constant(thin is good).but if insulator is alumina(aluminium oxide),it's very thin.then i think "about break down voltage of dielectric property of alumina ".

dielectric strength of alumina is 13.4 MV/m = 13.4 KV/mm.
that mean "if oxide layer is 1 mm,voltage should not over 13.4 KV."
-about making aluminium oxide layer,need borax.(how to = on wiki -> electrolytic capacitor)

-voltage drop on oxide layer?? i think no.

-about Meyer,theory if one side have +1 V and other side have -1 then voltage across them is 2 volts(one attach electron other push electron out then 2 side support this together). but this is not restrict amp flow. other case, one side is +1 volt and other side is 0 volt= not restrict amp flow too. 2 ways to restrict amps is "insulator(high resistance) or no difference voltage".

just thought with my 0.0000001 cent :)
geenee

 

Quote from geenee on July 5th, 2012, 03:46 PM

-HV Diode i found on wiki easy make HV Diode by use simple diode 1n4007(1000V,1A) many pieces and series soldering.it can handle this voltage(1000V*20=20000V,1A).

-High voltage source is hard to make same voltage.Other HV source... i have no idea....need help about this!!!

-about distance between gap.this like electrolyte process(thin gap high production)??? if insulator is pure water(100%pure) gap is importance because water is a huge of dielectric constant(thin is good).but if insulator is alumina(aluminium oxide),it's very thin.then i think "about break down voltage of dielectric property of alumina ".

dielectric strength of alumina is 13.4 MV/m = 13.4 KV/mm.
that mean "if oxide layer is 1 mm,voltage should not over 13.4 KV."
-about making aluminium oxide layer,need borax.(how to = on wiki -> electrolytic capacitor)

-voltage drop on oxide layer?? i think no.

-about Meyer,theory if one side have +1 V and other side have -1 then voltage across them is 2 volts(one attach electron other push electron out then 2 side support this together). but this is not restrict amp flow. other case, one side is +1 volt and other side is 0 volt= not restrict amp flow too. 2 ways to restrict amps is "insulator(high resistance) or no difference voltage".

just thought with my 0.0000001 cent :)
geenee

Why was Meyer using only a tiny diode (1000V)?

Maybe the reasonis to put the diode before the HV Coil. Then no high voltage diode is needed if both voltages are equal. Stanley Meyer put the diode before the first charging choke. It was one 1000V diode. Seems for me very tiny.
 
I think maybe he made this, because the voltage was canceled in the WFC (e.g. 20kV-20kV=0). So no HV could hit the Diode...(?? don´t know exactly)


Also good HV Diodes:
http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_trksid=m570.l3201&_nkw=microwave+diode&_sacat=0

Microwave Diodes can have upo to >8kV /0,5A

yes you are right, if the difference voltage is not equal we will get electrolyses and amp flow. If both are exactly (finetuning) equal and positiv like in your schematic no current can flow.

Two same built ignition coils maybe (Brand and type).
Or two different primary voltage supplys, for each ignition coil one adjustable supply. Then adjust both with a poti on the primary to finetune the voltage on the secondary. A difficult think is to measure the HV with a device which is able to :) because this can be destroy the equipment.  

watch this video, 1 wire (rectify HV positive side) can ionize water,see the wire attached water up like magnet.
 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a4YCojUlBZA

thanks
geenee

Genee! You made my day! Very very good video! :exclamation:

incredible, the water on the surface forms like the elwctrical field! Also bubbles are forming !! :exclamation:
So the ionization can be the key. That would confirm our theory which is equal to meyers explanation which is to find in the last part of the memo. (vic matrix) great!

Maybe one ignition coil is enough to ionize the water if the gap between pootential tube and neutral tube is small enough.

If this can basically bring results, the setup of meyer is indeed to confuse the people.
 do you know if the tube in the video is a neutral one?

thanks Amsy, i saw many video long time ago.like this video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxGeW4XXowc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAkRLjx8FeU

maybe need more test to proof that by myself.maybe,someone like you can proof that.

thanks
geenee

 

Hi genee,

I have found my old fly back trafo, so I can try this. (similar like this one http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=flyback+transformer )

The supplyvoltage of the flyback is 12V so its no problem to provide this. As higher the Input voltage so higher is the output voltage. ->12V will be 18kV
I will take for the "neutral" plate a stainless steel pipe and try to form bubbles like in the video.

Also i will try, to use two pipes like in the WFC and try one as + and the other as neutral. So the neutral one will have no conncection to any - .

thanks,Amsy,please post video on youtube.i think it great.

geenee