Quote from nbq201 on June 3rd, 2012, 03:56 PM

With PWM, you can get up to 7 or 8 different colors from the RGB Tri-Color
LED's.

Its a good idea. Maybe i can mix out some wavelength, 615nm or 645nm would be good.
I will see how it will works with these leds first:

3W 650 - 660nm
3W 405nm
3W 395nm
1W 365-370nm

Hi Russ,

I made a mistake, the LEDs I have are hi-power 740nM and not 790nM as I stated originally.

Hopefullly this message gets through.

-fuelsaver2006

Quote from Jeff Nading on June 5th, 2012, 02:22 PM

Quote from Quantum on June 5th, 2012, 09:20 AM

Quote from Jeff Nading on June 4th, 2012, 08:25 AM

Quote from Quantum on June 4th, 2012, 07:53 AM

Quote from nbq201 on June 3rd, 2012, 03:56 PM

The "Gas Processor" was different in Ionizing Air
If it was for Oxygen then it would be in the peak 615.8nm range of  Amber/Orange
LED's from the spectrum.    It's been reported that Oxygen is at it's peak at 777.19 nm, also which is in the  Longwave Near InfraRed scale, but it doesn't appear on the spectrum chart.

I agree, the 615 and 777nm are helping in the first electron removal from O atom so it will be ok for creating the O I as also the 645nm. For O II i would use 407nm. For O III 396nm. And for O IV 373nm. But every single led has effect on not jut one transition but for almost every transition from O I to O IV and this is good.

Now I am building my Air Ionizer with common elements what can you buy at stores. When its finished i will post my results. I am using flyback transformer around 125kHz for creating the positive corona discharge in a reflective tube in inside what will be illuminated by the LED's pulsing light on same frequency 125kHz but in 180 degree out of phase. For electron extraction will try out a few things for example a light bulb in series, resistive wire, dense screen mesh with steel wool or something like this. To test the ionizer i am planning to mix the ionized air and burn it with PB gas maybe, and of course will put it on some kind of engine air inlet witch will use regular fuel, sucking the air only trough the ionizer. I will also insert negatively charged fine water vapor in to the engine trying to minimize the benzine consumption. Now I am planning the driving circuits for the LED's, injector, temperature controller for the water heater before the injector, flyback drivers.

Using HHO with ionized hydrogen using 660nm leds in the resonant electrolyser is also a plan. So with all this together combined the water vapor, ionized air, HHO, exhaust gases I am hoping good results.

Can you post your flyback circuit and how it connects to the flyback transformer,if you have it already? Thanks Jeff.:D

My current setup looks like this.
The strange thing is when I connect the UC3844 pin5 to GND it stops working. I have tried with UC3843, UC3845 without success...  Its working around 125kHz and with low input current making nice corona discharge. My power supply is 17V.

Thanks for the schematic Quantum, I want to play with this one, Jeff.

I have modified a few things in flyback driver schematic.
Now using UC3845, GND connected. Working fine. When you turn the frequency potmeter, you will find resonance frequencies on which it will work. Make sure to use low Rds and low gate charge FET.

Ironmax appears to be  making a kit now for the Air Processor (see the video) with the 7 LED boards - cool.   It makes sense that Stan used the "old school" LED's from Radio Shack for ease and availability, and my research has pointed that these are Red Diffused LED's for Hydrogen  (HGG) and  Amber or Yellow Diffused LED's for Oxygen (Air Processor).   The frequency spectrum backs it up, and it's also what was commonly available at the time to him for parts.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZJRonwmFjw&feature=related

Welcome aboard sunpialia.

Max Miller is probably working on his gas processor at the moment.  It will be interesting to see if it actually creates a more energetic form of HHO.  I have my fingers crossed.

1min2sec

Quote from freethisone on June 8th, 2011, 03:10 PM

United nuclear carries the best IR LEDS invisible to the eye.
smaller wave is good, any other wave such as a flash from a camera UV would cause a movment perhaps due to the dilectric properties of the gas, but also carries more energy.
I like the steady wave low frequency, and i high pulse of  blue light for a kick.
But the high intensity of a laser would do a better job all around, because you can focus it on a reflector. Ionising radiation, same this is happening at the gap to a degree, because of heating.

It is possible that a laser pulse would heat the gas much quicker, wasn't it heat that caused the electrons to move to the outer rings? wasn't it the heat from a laser that ionized the air around the pulsed laser rocket? Stan had mentioned pushing the intensity up in several levels. that's why he stepped up the current in the conductor, and, or light intensity?  laser pulsed because of heating, but hey IR is a heat source..

The energy in the electron of a hydrogen atom, are conditioned to add charge, or induce charge on tiny dipoles, and electrons. I think Walter lewin said lower wave lenghth, more energy in the photon emf.  All by itself It will make a great fuel.

As an observer i find it amazing that unpolarized light has a radial field in all directions, due to photon radiation. And at 90 degrees to the source it becomes 100 percent polarized to the observer. 
hope that helpes good stuff Russ. be cool.:cool:

i wanted to see if anyone has come up with a effective light chamber for pulsing a flash camera. together with uv, and infrared light..

i think we can say for sure this also pertain to ionizing radiation, and higher energy combustion of fuels..


pause at one min two seconds.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0UMkQc4I-U#

Check this out:
http://www.energeticforum.com/showthread.php?t=19711

As soon as the scientists start calling electrons, dielectricity, many of the world's energy problems will be over.

Quote from Matt Watts on August 21st, 2014, 07:05 PM

Check this out:
http://www.energeticforum.com/showthread.php?t=19711

As soon as the scientists start calling electrons, dielectricity, many of the world's energy problems will be over.

thanks i checked it out. i agree vortex is gonna be the new tec. also plasma fussion.. vaporized fuels.. we did it folks

we really did change the world. its out there now..

IE the arc reactor, or simply Russ epg spark gap trigger. for use as an advancement of a rotary discharge like Tesla had achive.


i may have to also agree with him, electrik energy terminates into magnetic energy. i had isolated the component. cheers.
.

do you re member  how i showed that light was also A radial wave propagation? I say it does cause induction. i say lambda lambda lambda red shift. and cassimir effect. 


TESLA SAID  atheral vortical objects.   at the center there must be something.to support gravity, or at least the charges that make up a equal potential in space.



with nasa own images cheers..

solar CME generator. model of the sun.

coronal mass ejection,




m and X class with CME ejection. verifiable results.

Check out fire alarm on your wall do some research on the radioactive element inside....peace

Russ you have to add the light chamber to the arc reactor. the lights at the trigger itself,

well shielded, free of added heat, but in a reflected chamber.. the spark gap reactor. are you gonna post?

that is another of my secrets. the arc reactor chamber needs to be light activated and the pulse train or electron beam directly used as the source of power.. O:-)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mT-94c1Q6Ms#

this advancement to the forum is free of charge. see free energy . O:-)

as you see the reason over unity is possible, unity was never properly calculated. in order to calculate unity a vapour or plasma must be used.  take o2 add green laser. what will now happen? why do plants reflect green? it interacts with 02..


the arc reactor is a plasma spark chamber under vacume. the pap acts as the pump you see? that plasmoid can move magnetic dipoles, and add its charge as unity. the highest level of energy available requires a gap. reason electron additions. allowing for a gain in energy.

is it a gain or was unity a gap to begin with? the energy between  causes the effect. same as stars.

Quote from freethisone on September 2nd, 2014, 06:19 AM

Russ you have to add the light chamber to the arc reactor. the lights at the trigger itself,

well shielded, free of added heat, but in a reflected chamber.. the spark gap reactor. are you gonna post?

i have not added lights to the arc chamber. But light its self will do the trick if its intense enough.

~Russ

Quote from ~Russ on January 4th, 2012, 01:38 AM

hey guys check this stuff out, sent to me by Jacob W, i have seen this a while back but it is so fun...

Hydrogen atom emulator  :

http://astro.unl.edu/naap/hydrogen/animations/hydrogen_atom.html

also attached a photo he sent me. we have been over this but here i another diagram from NASA

enjoy!

~Russ

Hi, Russ.

Have you thought about utilizing Two Photon Absorption so that you can use a longer-wavelength LED array?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-photon_absorption
"Water absorbs UV radiation near 125 nm exiting the 3a1 orbital leading to dissociation into OH⁻ and H⁺. Through TPA this dissociation can be achieved by two photons near 266 nm."

Two Photon Absorption (more aptly termed Multiple Photon Absorption) is the reason why we can use wavelengths less than the resonant frequency wavelength of an atom for certain substances (water being one of them) to dissociate them... we hit it with a small (relative to the total dissociation energy required) energy, the electron rises into a higher orbit then decays, spitting out a photon. That photon then goes on to add energy to another electron if it's the right energy, and sometimes we get lucky and two (or more) photons of the correct energy combine to excite one electron, thereby knocking it out of its orbit. But it's pretty hit-and-miss. That's also why it's always most efficient to hit the water with its actual resonant frequency, rather than a subharmonic... which explains the following:

Water Radiolysis - Dissociating Water with Radio Waves
"Guenther and Holzapfel irradiated water with X-rays in contact with a large free volume in a vacuum system and found large continuing yields of hydrogen gas."

Also, what happens when you bounce light off two non-parallel mirrors (imagine two mirrors placed such that they're angled away from each other, and you aim your light so it bounces several times between those two mirrors from the wide end to the narrow end). Would that decrease the wavelength?

Also, what if, instead of putting all the LEDs into a flat planar array, you went high-tech and made them into a fiber optic loop of sorts... a "chain" of LEDs inputting their power to a fiber optic. Theoretically, any energy field (light, gravity, magnetic) can change the wavelength of light passing through it. If the energy potential increases with light passage the wavelength diminishes, and vice versa. So if each LED is adding cumulatively to the energy in the fiber optic, the wavelength should become shorter. You'd have fewer photons of a higher energy.

{EDIT}
I just learned that I was describing a Fiber Ring Laser above.
{/EDIT}

Or, rather than using ultraviolet light, you could just go whole-hog and use x-rays:

Quote from Cycle on December 9th, 2014, 11:09 AM

As regards Meyer's gas processor (I think it's called), where he used LEDs... in my Energetic Forum posts, I derived the resonant frequency of the short O-H bond, it's up in the x-ray range... how about if, rather than hitting the water with light, we hit it with x-rays, given that the closer we can get to the actual harmonic frequency (as opposed to a subharmonic), the more effectively we can resonantly add energy?

How?

Miniaturized high-speed modulated x-ray source
A miniaturized high-speed modulated X-ray source (MXS) device and a method for rapidly and arbitrarily varying with time the output X-ray photon intensities and energies.

That's an x-ray source that essentially is an electron "amplifier", taking the light from an LED and adding energy to it until it's in the x-ray range. The good thing about this device is you can tune its wavelength from 120 eV (10.332 nm) to 120 KeV (0.010332 nm). This would let you tweak the system to get the best response for whatever gas you're using. If you're using three gasses, you'd use three of these at the correct wavelengths.

Of course, 10.332 nm is a bit too short of a wavelength for our purposes, I think (the opposite problem we had prior, trying to find an LED that gave a short enough wavelength), but with all the brain power around here, it should be a snap to shift that tunable range of wavelengths to what you need.

Or, rather than LEDs, go with a plasma light bulb (at least, when they hit the market). They have twice the light output of LEDs, and just like a fluorescent bulb, their primary light wavelength can be 'tuned' via dopants.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTGsM9pplUs#

there have been a lot about this discussed in the past for sure :)

because ozone is a by product of ionizing radiation, a light source does not have to be used.


Nomenclature

The trivial name ozone is the most commonly used and preferred IUPAC name. The systematic names 1λ1,3λ1-trioxidane and catena-trioxygen, valid IUPAC names, are constructed according to the substitutive and additive nomenclatures, respectively. The name ozone derives from ozein (ὄζειν), the Greek word for smell (verb), referring to ozone's distinctive smell.

In appropriate contexts, ozone can be viewed as trioxidane with two hydrogen atoms removed, and as such, trioxidanylidene may be used as a context-specific systematic name, according to substitutive nomenclature. By default, these names pay no regard to the radicality of the ozone molecule. In even more specific context, this can also name the non-radical singlet ground state, whereas the diradical state is named trioxidanediyl.

Trioxidanediyl (or ozonide) is used, non-systematically, to refer to the substituent group (-OOO-). Care should be taken to avoid confusing the name of the group for the context-specific name for ozone given above.
History
Christian Friedrich Schönbein (18 October 1799 – 29 August 1868)
A prototype ozonometer built by John Smyth in 1865

In 1785, Dutch chemist Martinus van Marum was conducting experiments involving electrical sparking above water when he noticed an unusual smell, which he attributed to the electrical reactions, failing to realize he had in fact created ozone.[2] A half century later, Christian Friedrich Schönbein noticed the same pungent odor and recognized it as the smell often following a bolt of lightning. In 1839 he succeeded in isolating the gaseous chemical and named it "ozone", from the Greek word ozein (ὄζειν) meaning "to smell".[3][4] For this reason, Schönbein is generally credited with the discovery of ozone.[2][5] The formula for ozone, O3, was not determined until 1865 by Jacques-Louis Soret[6] and confirmed by Schönbein in 1867.[3][7]

For much of the second half of the nineteenth century and well into the twentieth, ozone was considered a healthy component of the environment by naturalists and health-seekers. The City of Beaumont in California had as its official slogan "Beaumont: Zone of Ozone," as evidenced on postcards and Chamber of Commerce letterhead.[8] Naturalists working outdoors often considered the higher elevations beneficial because of their ozone content. "There is quite a different atmosphere [at higher elevation] with enough ozone to sustain the necessary energy [to work]," wrote naturalist Henry Henshaw, working in Hawaii.[9] Seaside air was considered to be healthy because of its "ozone" content but the smell giving rise to this belief is in reality that of rotting seaweed.[10]
Physical properties

Ozone is colourless or slightly bluish gas (blue when liquified), slightly soluble in water and much more soluble in inert non-polar solvents such as carbon tetrachloride or fluorocarbons, where it forms a blue solution. At 161 K (−112 °C; −170 °F), it condenses to form a dark blue liquid. It is dangerous to allow this liquid to warm to its boiling point, because both concentrated gaseous ozone and liquid ozone can detonate. At temperatures below 80 K (−193.2 °C; −315.7 °F), it forms a violet-black solid.[11]

Most people can detect about 0.01 μmol/mol of ozone in air where it has a very specific sharp odor somewhat resembling chlorine bleach. Exposure of 0.1 to 1 μmol/mol produces headaches, burning eyes and irritation to the respiratory passages.[12] Even low concentrations of ozone in air are very destructive to organic materials such as latex, plastics and animal lung tissue.

Ozone is diamagnetic, which means that its electrons are all paired. In contrast, O2 is paramagnetic, containing two unpaired electrons.
Structure


key feature Most people can detect about 0.01 μmol/mol of ozone in air where it has a very specific sharp odor somewhat resembling chlorine bleach. Exposure of 0.1 to 1 μmol/mol produces headaches, burning eyes and irritation to the respiratory passages.[12] Even low concentrations of ozone in air are very destructive to organic materials such as latex, plastics and animal lung tissue.

I've been diving far too deep into quantum mechanics... so I'll just throw this out there as something that may be possible for academia to accomplish.

How about quantum corrals tuned to the resonant frequency of the short O-H bond? No external energy input required, the electron standing waves inside the quantum corrals would be resonating at the required frequency to add energy to the short O-H bond.

A quantum corral is essentially a copper surface with individual iron atoms deposited on it in a certain shape to force the electrons to set up standing waves inside that shape. Now imagine an entire sheet of these quantum corrals tuned to the resonant frequency of the short O-H bond... the electron standing waves add energy to that bond until it breaks. Where does the energy come from? The environment... it's "funneled" into the quantum corral to keep the electrons resonating by the very nature of quantum mechanics and quantum electrodynamics.

It'd dissociate water without electricity. Given enough surface area, it'd dissociate a lot of water.

Self-assembled monolayers (SAMs) to increase surface hydrophilic properties...

Hydrophilic surfaces are polar, meaning they create a charge differential that electrostatically interacts with the hydrogen in water... it's not a very large charge, but every little bit helps in splitting the water. So at the hydrophilic surface is a negative charge, and in the bulk of the water is a positive charge.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-T7tCMUDXU#t=260

Just FYI, hydrophilic surfaces force the water into an H₃O₂ configuration, which lowers the dissociation constant.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16833469
"Very intense 1 <-- 0 transitions are observed below 1100 cm(-1) in both cases and are surprisingly sharp, with the 697 cm(-1) transition in H₃O₂- being among the lowest in energy of any shared proton system measured to date."

http://checont6.ucsd.edu/pdf/046.continetti.2001.pdf
"Vibrationally resolved product translational energy [N(ETOT)] spectra for the dissociative photodetachment (DPD) of H₃O₂"

That's 1.8 eV or 688.8 nm wavelength (2.8839e-19 Joules). Note that H₂O requires 13.577 eV (2.1753e-18 Joules) to dissociate. That's only 13.2575% of the energy requirement to dissociate H₃O₂ as compared to the energy required to dissociate H₂O.

So, if we made the electrodes or plates with SAMs or some sort of superhydrophilic surface (and we could get the plate surfaces within a hair's width of each other to force the H₂O out from between the plates, leaving only H₃O₂ to be dissociated), it'd get us a tiny step closer to autoelectrolysis (the water spontaneously dissociates without energy input).

And from that YouTube video above, we could actually create a "water battery" by tapping the charge differential in water off a large number of plates, using it to charge a capacitor, then 'joule ringing' that up to a voltage that is usable in a conventional electrolysis cell. Water providing the power to dissociate water.

you only need the steam resonator, or sonic transducer.

Quote from Cycle on December 13th, 2014, 08:51 PM

And from that YouTube video above, we could actually create a "water battery" by tapping the charge differential in water off a large number of plates, using it to charge a capacitor, then 'joule ringing' that up to a voltage that is usable in a conventional electrolysis cell. Water providing the power to dissociate water.

Or just use the tapped and stored electric energy directly as is, that would be some battery :thumbsup:

Quote from Lynx on December 14th, 2014, 12:42 AM

Or just use the tapped and stored electric energy directly as is, that would be some battery :thumbsup:

It'd be too low of a voltage to dissociate water directly, hence the suggestion of a joule ringer and capacitor.

Quote from Cycle on December 14th, 2014, 10:17 AM

It'd be too low of a voltage to dissociate water directly, hence the suggestion of a joule ringer and capacitor.

What I mean is why not use the stored elecric energy directly to power whatever there may be, say LED's, charge cell phones, batteries etc.
Just a thought.

I've been researching hydrophilic electrodes. What we want is an electrically conductive electrode that is stable in water, and has a bandgap that is as close as possible to equal to the dissociation constant of H₃O₂.

Graphene-doped metal appears to be the way to go. Graphene is an atomic-scale honeycomb lattice of graphite (carbon). It's 100 times stronger than steel and conducts electricity efficiently. It's too bad we can't yet buy graphene in large, thick sheets... it'd be the ideal electrode.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23240759
Superhydrophilic graphene-loaded TiO₂

It's got charge separation already owing to its conduction band between the graphene and TiO₂, and since it's superhydrophilic, the water attempts to attach to it, scouring off any fouling. And it's highly conductive.

http://journal.insciences.org/wp-content/files_mf/1664_171x_1_2_80.pdf
"Spin-polarized DFT calculations show that adsorption of water molecules on graphene plays the role of defects which facilitates the tunability of the bandgap and results in opening a large bandgap of ~ 2 eV."

You'll note that's larger than the 1.8 eV dissociation constant of H₃O₂. So there would be a slight cost over the 1.8 eV required to dissociate H₃O₂ alone... but keep in mind that it's the hydrophilic surface that forces water to reorient into H₃O₂ in the first place, thereby increasing the efficiency of dissociating it.

But good news... the thicker the graphene sheet, the lower the bandgap:
https://www.me.utexas.edu/news/pdfs/Graphene_Ruoff.pdf
"Angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy (ARPES) studies suggested that this gap decreased as the sample thickness increased and eventually approached zero when the number of layers exceeded four"

ZnO / graphene oxide also appears to be a good material.
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/am403149g
"When the amount of graphene oxide added is 10 mg, the graphene–ZnO quasi-shell–core composite possesses the optimal photocatalytic degradation efficiency and the best photoelectrochemical performance."

You can purchase small sizes of graphene 'foam':
http://graphene-supermarket.com/White_Papers/Graphene%203D-%20free%20standing-flyer.pdf
But attaching electrodes to a graphene 'foam' might prove problematic.

How to dope the base with graphene?
http://iopscience.iop.org/0022-3727/46/2/025301/pdf/0022-3727_46_2_025301.pdf
You mix 416.75 ml acetone (99.9% pure), 88.25 ml deionized water, 1.5 grams (high purity 5 micron to 45 micron) graphite, put it into a sealed jar. Then you high speed blend the solution for 12 hours (this is where a high speed pulse motor powering a large stirring magnet would come in handy, it needs to blend at about 15000 RPM) or in a sonic cleaning machine (like you use for jewelry) for 12 hours (if you use this method, fill the sonicator with water, then set your jar with the water/acetone/graphite mix into the water, and be sure to keep the sonicator cavity topped off with water as it'll evaporate pretty quickly, and you might have to drop ice cubes into the water in the sonicator cavity because it'll heat up). You can also put it into a paint mixer (the kind that shakes the paint can back and forth), but you'd have to run it for as much as 24 hours.

That'll give you a liquid solution of graphene that is stable in liquid solution and will remain so for weeks. Let it sit and settle for about a week. Then you put a working amount in a test tube and centrifuge it at 1000 RPM for an hour to separate out any heavier graphite particles. Then you suck out the liquid, leaving behind the heavier graphite particles that didn't get broken up.

Next, you polish your plates to a mirror finish to remove the oxide layer. Now, it has to be said here that graphite contributes to pitting corrosion on some forms of stainless steel (Nichrome, Inconel, Inconel X, Inconel 702, 304, 310, 316, 330, 347), and induces galvanic corrosion on aluminum.

Here's the corrosion potentials of a variety of metals, from most anodic to most cathodic:
http://www.eaa1000.av.org/technicl/corrosion/galvanic.htm
Active (Anodic)
Magnesium
Mg alloy AZ-31B
Mg alloy HK-31A
Zinc (hot-dip, die cast, or plated)
Beryllium (hot pressed)
Al 7072 clad on 7075
Al 2014-T3
Al 1160-H14
Al 7079-T6
Cadmium (plated)
Uranium
Al 218 (die cast)
Al 5052-0
Al 5052-H12
Al 5456-0, H353
Al 5052-H32
Al 1100-0
Al 3003-H25
Al 6061-T6
Al A360 (die cast)
Al 7075-T6
Al 6061-0
Indium
Al 2014-0
Al 2024-T4
Al 5052-H16
Tin (plated)
Stainless steel 430 (active)
Lead
Steel 1010
Iron (cast)
Stainless steel 410 (active)
Copper (plated, cast, or wrought)
Nickel (plated)
Chromium (Plated)
Tantalum
AM350 (active)
Stainless steel 310 (active)
Stainless steel 301 (active)
Stainless steel 304 (active)
Stainless steel 430 (active)
Stainless steel 410 (active)
Stainless steel 17-7PH (active)
Tungsten
Niobium (columbium) 1% Zr
Brass, Yellow, 268
Uranium 8% Mo.
Brass, Naval, 464
Yellow Brass
Muntz Metal 280
Brass (plated)
Nickel-silver (18% Ni)
Stainless steel 316L (active)
Bronze 220
Copper 110
Red Brass
Stainless steel 347 (active)
Molybdenum, Commercial pure
Copper-nickel 715
Admiralty brass
Stainless steel 202 (active)
Bronze, Phosphor 534 (B-1)
Monel 400
Stainless steel 201 (active)
Carpenter 20 (active)
Stainless steel 321 (active)
Stainless steel 316 (active)
Stainless steel 309 (active)
Stainless steel 17-7PH (passive)
Silicone Bronze 655
Stainless steel 304 (passive)
Stainless steel 301 (passive)
Stainless steel 321 (passive)
Stainless steel 201 (passive)
Stainless steel 286 (passive)
Stainless steel 316L (passive)
AM355 (active)
Stainless steel 202 (passive)
Carpenter 20 (passive)
AM355 (passive)
A286 (passive)
Titanium 5A1, 2.5 Sn
Titanium 13V, 11Cr, 3Al (annealed)
Titanium 6Al, 4V (solution treated and aged)
Titanium 6Al, 4V (anneal)
Titanium 8Mn
Titanium 13V, 11Cr 3Al (solution heat treated and aged)
Titanium 75A
AM350 (passive)
Silver
Gold
Graphite
Noble (Less Active, Cathodic)

The closer together the two metals in the list above, the less chance of galvanic corrosion. Since we want to use graphene on the cathodes to force H₂O into an H₃O₂ configuration, our best bet would be to use gold (prohibitively expensive), silver (prohibitively expensive), AM350 (only for non-acidic conditions), Titanium 75A (which would make an excellent electrode, and is currently in use in desalination plants), or 202 SS (which can be electrochemically polished in preparation for graphene coating, and has good corrosion properties due to being passive). These would make good cathodes.

Now I just have to figure out how to get the graphene to attach to the plate surface... I'm not sure if it's as simple as painting it on the surface and letting the carbon in the graphene molecularly attach to the metal as the acetone / water dries, then buffing with a soft cloth and heavy pressure to ensure a uniform layer. I can't find much info.

For the anodes, we have to find a metal that's at the other end of the scale, yet is tough enough to stand up to electrolysis. This will give us the largest electrochemical potential (and thus reduce the amount of electricity we have to supply to accomplish dissociation), while still giving good electrode life. So in this case, we'd want to use something like SS434, which is SS430 with molybdenum for enhanced corrosion protection.

This report shows nickel borate makes a good electrolysis anode, as a replacement for cobalt-based anodes:
http://www.gizmag.com/electrode-materials-hydrogen-fuel/15118/

Also, Cobalt / Oxygen / Flourine catalytic anodes to reduce dissociation overpotential:
http://www.google.com/patents/US8192609

----------

I intend to try something different... I'll use magnesium hexahydrate in the water itself to force it into the hexagonal configuration. It's formally notated as Mg[H₂O]₆²⁺, but more accurately would be notated as Mg[H₂O]₂[OH₂]₄²⁺. Then I'll try hitting it with different forms of energy resonantly (magnetism, light, RF, x-ray, electricity). I'll also try sound, adding PVDF-TFE to the water to act as a piezoelectric. The surfaces of the dissociation chamber will be hydrophilic to further help water change its configuration to H₃O₂.

If we could find pure barium, it'd be even better. The technically correct chemical notation of pure barium in water would be Ba[H₂O]₂[OH₂]₂[O]₄²⁺. You can see that it's so reactive that it splits the water into OH and O from the outset. The problem is, it's so reactive it's a fire hazard even in air (it has to be stored in noble gasses or under mineral oil), so introducing it to the water would be problematic, and it corrodes quickly to barium oxide in air.

----------

For the plates, since the H₃O₂ exclusion zone is only on the order of 10-15 microns or so, and therefore the plates have to be that close or thereabouts so that only H₃O₂ is between the plates, not H₂O, how about very thin beads of silicone caulk run at regular spacing down one side of the plates... the voltage will exert a force that tries to pull the plates together. When they hit the silicone caulk, they can't move anymore, thus they can't short out.

That problem solved, we'd have to come up with some way of accurately applying a 10-15 micron high bead of silicone caulk

Very, very interesting. Here's part of the puzzle as to why hydrophilic surfaces lower the dissociation constant for water... if we could figure out how to get down to the molecular level and create a surface that's got 8.64 angstrom square "islands" between 18 angstrom deep and 2.82 angstrom wide channels, we could make dissociation not only spontaneous, but exothermic.

I think it operates by a mechanism whereby water naturally undergoes deprotonation spontaneously all the time (at its slowest, at pH 7, about every millisecond) as it swaps hydrogens between water molecules, but it prevents subsequent protonation by preferentially adsorbing the protons into the platinum terraces.

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1211.2847.pdf
Autocatalytic and cooperatively-stabilized dissociation of water on a stepped platinum surface
"The adsorption energies of water clusters at the edge of the step are larger than on Pt(111) by 0.18 eV for the monomer to 0.09 eV for the trimer, as a consequence of the increased reactivity of the step edge. In the adsorption of intact water dimers and trimers there is a competition between O-Pt bonding and H-bonding, which results in optimal geometries where one of the water molecules, the hydrogen-bond (HB) acceptor only, detaches from the step edge and forms a weak HB with the lower terrace of the metal, as can be seen in Fig. 1b and 1c (left panels). This configuration facilitates the dissociation of the water molecule detached from the step, lowering the activation energy from 0.8 eV for the monomer to 0.5 eV for dimers and trimers. After dissociation, shorter (and then stronger) chemical bonds are formed between all the oxygen atoms and the Pt atoms at the step edge. In the trimer a proton transfer mechanism leads to the stable configuration, where the remaining hydroxyl is the central molecule of the cluster that accepts HBs from the two neighboring water molecules (Fig. 1c). Whereas in the case of the monomer the energy cost of breaking an O-H bond is only partially compensated by a stronger O-Pt bond, resulting in a large dissociation energy (0.51 eV), the rearrangement of the clusters reduces the dissociation energy to 0.2 eV for the dimer and to nearly zero in the case of the trimer."

Apparently they've gotten to the point that 1/4th of the water molecules can spontaneously dissociate every 300 seconds... so that equates to a rate (for one liter of water) to 1/4 liter of water every 5 minutes, or about 186 lpm of HHO at STP... if I did the calculations correctly, and assuming they scaled their process up that large.

Since we, as garage-based tinkerers, don't have the ability to create "groomed" surfaces at the molecular level, a good analog to this would be a plethora of platinum wires as a replacement for the flat electrode surface. You could even twist them together into bunches... as long as the spacing between the wires was greater than the size of the water molecule (and how could it not be?), what you've achieved is packing a bunch of "stepped" surfaces (ie: the round surface of the platinum wires) into a small space.

Now, you twist, say, 10 platinum wires together into a bundle. You create 10 of these bundles. You clamp these bundles at each end with flat platinum bars, and put flat platinum bars between the clamping bars to form a square, then put that into the water as an electrode, and put voltage to it.

But the smaller the wire we use, the closer to that 18 angstrom step we get around the diameter of that wire... the smallest wire I could find was 0.0011" (0.02794 mm), 99.95% pure, 22 ft long, for a price of $167.00 per roll. If each wire bundle was 5 inches long, we could create 5 bundles of 10 wires each, so it'd require two rolls of wire to get 10 bundles.

Now, where it gets really interesting is in the table in that report:

Configuration	Eadsorption	Edissociation
monomer	0.48 eV	0.51 eV
dimer	0.55 eV	0.20 eV
trimer	0.57 eV	0.01 eV
chain (2H20)	0.59 eV	0.17 eV
chain (4H20)	0.59 eV	-0.10 eV
chain (6H2O)	0.59 eV	-0.08 eV
chain (12H20)	0.59 eV	-0.08 eV

Now... if we then put magnesium hexahydrate Mg[H₂O]₆²⁺ into the water to force water into a 6 H₂O lattice, would that satisfy the "chain (6H₂O)" portion of that table? Because if so, we've just found a way to force water to dissociate without any external energy input. Meaning if we put a little energy in, it speeds up the process greatly.

If we don't put any energy in, where does the energy come from to dissociate the water? The report referenced above (from the Max Planck Institute for Polymer Research) states that it comes from ZPE.

Platinum being expensive, I'm searching for a substitute metal that'd work as well as platinum.

One thing I learned today... we definitely don't want to put graphene on platinum electrodes... when exposed to hydrogen, the graphene attached to platinum turns to diamond. At room temperature and no added pressure. And diamond is non-conductive.

http://phys.org/news/2014-03-graphite-diamond.html
http://phys.org/news/2014-02-diamane-diamond-pressure.html

So the surface "grooming" is a good way to go for platinum, whereas stainless or nickel would benefit from a graphene layer. I've got queries into a few laser etching and semiconductor companies to see if they can etch at the angstom level. If so, I'll have a few carbon fiber plates coated with 20 nm of platinum, then have them etched like I described above, and experiment with them.