Beautiful motor Tutanka...
YouTube - mammasat's Channel

Any diagrams or schematics?

I looked back at some posts. You mentioned copper tubes.
Are you using 2 concentric copper tubes? If so, what is
the gap?

-------------------------------------------------------------

ATTN: GET THIS DOC and read it and read all the posts in this thread
BEFORE posting any questions:

Here is a 3 page compilation of this thread. I condensed it into a couple
categories. It is short and sweet. It is INCOMPLETE. There are a few
things that need to be added that may or may not be apparent to get
a full working motor. But it will give the Nitrogen Hydroxide story and more.
How to Make Nitrogen Hydroxide
Version 1.0 - Jan 31, 2010

HI,
About copper tubes.. you refer to GP?
About engine.. I cant divulgate anything... Sorry

Does ozone have anything to do with what you're doing?

Tutanka, gp as in the after cell processor of what to do with the
gas after it has been made?

Tutanka, you are ionizing water vapor and adding it to hho.

You're making hho somehow and are ionizing air and water mixture and
adding them together.

If you're not using copper concentric tubes to produce hho, then
you're using the copper tube for something else.

I have open video for an friend and I have forget to close. Video isn't public, with request I can add friends to see that..

You wrote:

You're making hho somehow and are ionizing air and water mixture and
adding them together.

No, the procedure isn't correct.. as written you don't need more water ..

Hi Tutanka,

I'm talking about ionizing steam or moisture in a "gas processor" or maybe just
ionizing the air and mixing that with HHO.

You mention a copper pipe - is the processing of gas happening inside the
pipe then? Between plates or points?

"HI Aaron,
First of all ... I'm an italian researcher and engineer and sorry I can't have an my thread, I have signed an NDA about that.. However I can explain my idea. Some peoples, including Sebosfato, don't consider that; all are oriented to create an great amount of gas but the gas formed with hydrogen is very volatile and have little molecules, after some tests on standard engines the same result is that gas is lost trought piston rings and valves if send normally trought manifold inlet. For that more companies like BMW was oriented to create direct injection of hydrogen in chambre of combustion. And you have to consider other important point, water gas interact a lot with metals parts inside engine, for that, to peoples orientend to use that gas, I suggest treatment of ceramization of cylinder, head of piston and chambre of combustion. However my studies are oriented to the creation of new molecular mixture that can be used normally inside standard engines. In part is the same concept of Meyer. If you analyze injector you found that in fact is an compact WFC minicell. Air treatment with GP, as previously written, is necessary to start the chain reaction for obtain thermal explosive energy. But method explained from h2opower for me isn't correct .. you have to anaylize the words " thermal explosive energy".. For h2opower only oxygen ionized and destabilized is necessary, mixed with water fog, to create thermal explosive energy.. For that I suggest to all peoples to demand an video that prove that first to spent other moneys for an doubt project."

Just read that,

I have the best oil additive in the world - the only undersurface lubricant
known to man - I'm not worried about wear and tear with water or
anything.

Anyway, "Air treatment with GP, as previously written, is necessary to start the chain reaction for obtain thermal explosive energy."

Yes! That is what I'm saying... ok, so you're using the GP to simply ionize
the air - or maybe not so simple.

So with HHO + ionized air = my preference is the plasma spark ignition.

With a lawnmower test Peter and I did, we started to move to steam
injection and we could advance timing.

Anyway, what is your opinion on the combination of hho and ionized air?

Are you ducting the ionized air before or after the carburetor butterfly?
I don't know if it makes a difference because when in the chamber under
compression, I'm guessing it would be homogenized.

p.s., I'm not interested in high volume hho. I'm interested in high QUALITY
water fuel.

HI Aaron,
I know that

Hi Alex and Aaron

This a little bit difficult to explain on a public forum as Alex has said, he is commited not to give an exposure and I am also under the official secrets act that I signed back when I worked for Marconi in England, once signed it is like a death warrent, it is with you all your life.

@ Aaron, Alex is working on a new engine which creates very high torque which is what is needed to run on this type of fuel. All I can say is as far as a jet engine is concerned, it works, but heat is needed to start the chain off. Now in a piston engine there are a lot of problems such as Alex has said with hydrogen leakage into other parts of the engine, so most of the fuel has to be made in the moment of use in the engine and not before

@ Alex, hope you do not mind me making this post as we both have an interest in this

Mike

Aaron,

Please appreciate that Tutanka, as well as myself and another member of this forum, are under heavy NDA obligation, thus we are not at liberty to shed as much light on this topic as we'd like to.

You cover several tenets in your quest for information, on some you are correct, on some you are way off the mark.

This lubricating oil you mention, I can assure you it's not the magic panacea, for it only coats the substrate metals at the molecular level, thus is not the suitable protectant you seem to think it is. What, you don't think we don't use the best "metal conditioner" too?

This type of metal conditioner, while great, cannot alleviate all of the problems associated with metal to metal friction points once the lubricant is contaminated with water.

The answer is, do not let a reaction occur within the combustion chamber which causes this problem to occur, full stop.

Look for another way of delivering the "fuel", one which does not have that particular type of hydrogen separated from the other molecules apparent in the combustion chamber at the time of compression.

Introducing that particular type of hydrogen into any combustion chamber will bring on this water in the lube issue, as a large portion of it will always escape the seal between the piston and bore, unless certain steps are taken to thwart the problem from occurring from the outset, by that I mean, you can only deliver that type of hydrogen a certain way.

Tutanka has worked long and hard at addressing this issue, though I'm certain his achievements will not attract the acclaim they so duly deserve. Not right now anyway.

H20power seems to think he has Meyers tech sussed out completely. I can assure you he does not, and all of the sheep following him are in for one rude failure after another, should they attempt to proceed without accepting a few plain facts.

Meyer seeded his disclosures with ample false trails, thus if any follower chose the wrong trail, they were assuredly destined for failure. For some strange arrogant reason, H20power seems to think he's the only one to understand the principals of what Meyer was messing around with, and he also seems to feel that he has the right to crucify anyone with views at variance/odds to his.

Tutanka tried to impart this most significant point to H20power, yet was ridiculed and made to look like the fool on every occasion, even to the most recent post made by the H20power.

Blatant ignorance and bullheadedness on behalf of H20power has literally sown the seeds of his own failure, as history will show, that is, if he ever gets to the point of testing anything.

I tried to tell H20power that a simple language barrier was mostly to blame for his not understanding the sage words of Tutanka at that time, but alas, he did choose to ignore this advice, as did many others, to their detriment it seems.

Tutanka is no fool, as history will soon show. I've certainly never met a more tenacious and determined individual in all of my days. It's a true pleasure to work with this man.

I should add, there is another member of this forum working with us behind the scenes, and as much as I'd like to disclose his identity, the NDA prohibits me doing so. This other fellow is a master of his trade, thus his input has been immensely helpful as he's been able to turn simple ideas into reality with his advanced machining skills.

Aaron, you mention plasma, well, I am not at liberty to give over much detail, as I'm sure you can appreciate, but I can say this, plasma is a part of it, a big part in fact.

It's apparent that nobody else is quite as advanced as we are in this concept, thus it's pure folly for us to disclose any more details at this time.

Aaron, please feel free to PM me if you seek more info.

Can you also please delete the Tutanka thread now. It serves no valid purpose.

(Edit off topic)

I disagree, this thread should not be deleted IMO.

It is perfectly OK to disagree with the method or direction to achieve the goals in this forum. IMO it is also OK to post that opinion once or twice.

But when it becomes numerous posts, they become distractions to the subject of a thread.

Those who apparently knows better should start their own thread, present their theories AND their working prototypes.

@Aaron
Thank you for making this illustrative example.

Then they will get all the audience they may want.

h20power said:
"At this point in the game I want to finish what I have started so if I fail I can learn from my mistakes."

H20power may be right, he may be wrong. But he has the right to work for his idea without numerous discouraging posts. I also think others has the right to help without being characterized as sheep.

What I see is a hard working person trying to do constructive work. I see a few others trying to help, but needing help with some basic electronics.

And more electronic skill would be helpful. If we all had the skills of DrStiffler, our goal was reached now.

I have no problem to use some hours to help. If this makes me a sheep, let it be. But please avoid such characterizations in the future, to me it is disrespectful.

But this thread should not be deleted. Let it stand as a monument over how much help can be expected from some members posting lots of advice in i.e. the thread h20power started. No one mentioned, no one forgotten.

Please note I have made no statement about your skills, the potential value of your work, and whether you are on the track to success or not.

Eric

Don't count me in here. Like everyone else I have the 24/7 limitation.

I'm certainly no expert in chemistry, so I let others do the pioneering work.

When it comes to ordinary electronics I have some experience. When it comes to the other 8 types of electricity Hector mentions, I consider myself a newbie.

Thanks to Bedini, Hector and DrStiffler and many other skilled experimenters from this forum, I have taken my first steps on this road, and the road seem long to get an understanding to do my own successful designs. So don't count me in on chemistry.

May I ask you the favor to continue here, and stop posting in the "Stanley Meyer explained" thread. I think even the greatest bonehead (probably me) got your point.

Please allow h20power & "sheep" time to succeed or fail without more "advice", seen from the subject of that thread.

I look forward to be enlightened by your knowledge, and seeing a video of your theories put to work in a fully disclosed prototype.

Maybe what tutanka discuss is somehow related to the Papp inert gas engine. It also ran without fuel, just using electricity to trigger a process.

Eric

Vacclaisocryptene + special oil formulation made for 100% hydrogen
engines where water is the byproduct upon combustion works. Some of the
moisture barrier inside the combustion chamber is actually a good thing
since it acts as an insulation to the heat and helps lock it into the
place where it does some good instead of it being wasted by conducting
to the metal. Radiant containment can be done in multiple ways.
Obviously there is a point where too much moisture is difficult to overcome.

Water is also a byproduct of gasoline combustion. You can also use an
external oil filter that cleans the oil as you drive, removes water and is
good for up to 100,000 miles per oil change...only oil needs to be added
but not replaced.

Anyway, you seem to be making a distinction between hypergas h1 or
h2 regular. H2 I think easily will form the water - is that what you're saying
needs to be introduced in another way?

I agree with the basics that H2O says about Meyer but I actually think
it is a lot more simple than Meyer makes it out to be - at least the
process is a lot more straight forward. I'm confident of one thing, there
is no requirement to have massive amounts of hho like what most people
have been trying to accomplish. The amount to run an engine completely
on hho in any practical way is way too much for any typical hho cell
that everyone makes. It doesn't matter if it is tubes or plates.

I'm sure small engines can run on hho alone just fine with other air of
course and the required amount can probably be made. But with
driving a car or any larger engine, I'm not convinced that a cell needs to
produce a high amount at all. There is enough potential in small amounts
and what is in small hho + air to release all the power that is needed.

I've beaten Faraday on multiple tests but it is irrelevant - there still isn't
enough volume of gas, period. Sanded plates versus smooth, permanent
magnets or electromagnetic coil additions, isolated electrolyte in each
cell like a car battery, different materials of plates or tubes, etc...
A lot of different things make a difference in gas production but no
magic "open sesame" combo that suddenly splits everything at once.

I know the possibility exists but not with these conventional cells and
not without some serious cascade effect or "ionization by collision".

Anyway, H2O started his thread and is free to share his interpretation of
Meyer's technology in there. Other viewpoints are welcome and this is
why I started this one.... and there are plenty of other threads on
water fuel as well. This thread... I'm specifically interested in ionization.

I didn't follow the whole thread because there is too much stuff in there
but I peak in once in a while. Recently was the first time I have even
seen Tutanka post, searched and found a few more posts and my
intuition tells me from a few things he mentioned that he actually has
something. Then I found that rotary video, which looks pretty cool, but
is nothing but eye candy unless there is some context to put it in.

I'm sure plasma is a big part of it. It is possible that even nitrous oxide
is produced and/or other other alterations to the air. I'm not a chemist
but I'm sure of cold fusion effects with the plasma and that the bright
light itself is helping to transmute or physically change the mixture in
some way.

You mention reaction not taking place inside the combustion chamber.
Then it would be outside and I don't see the HHO production as really
being a reaction but there is a mixing taking place before the combustion
chamber. That is a little confusing. HHO and it was mentioned more water
isn't needed so air? HHO mixing with ionized air.

Wiki: "A positively-charged ion is produced when an electron bonded to an atom (or molecule) absorbs enough energy to escape from the electric potential barrier that originally confined it, thus breaking the bond and freeing it to move. The amount of energy required is called the ionization potential.

A negatively-charged ion is produced when a free electron collides with an atom and is subsequently caught inside the electric potential barrier, releasing any excess energy."

So is it desirable to negatively or positively charge the air - if it is the
air we want to ionize? Do we want to remove an "electron" or add one
or more than one?

High voltage electrostatics are probably the easiest way to to do it.
Even a neon sign transformer over a gap can ionize air, negative ion
generators, regular spark plug with regular spark ionizes air and of
course a plasma "spark" can ionize air.

If we want to negatively charge the air, then simply adding a negative
ion generator may be all that is needed. Patrick Flanagan has a great
patent on creating an electron cascade effect in the air surrounding
the ionizer. I have tried to ionize steam by giving it a negative charge
by mixing this stream of electrons with the steam.

If positively charged air, an ozone generator could do it just making
oxygen clusters I suppose.

Anyway, just thinking out loud.

By the way, I don't even know what the specific "sage" advice of
Tutanka to H2O was...the ionization issue or something else? There is
too much to read in that thread. I know - I should read it if I want to
know but is it already addressed here?

Instead of deleting this thread, I can move the posts to another thread
with a different name about Ionizing water fuel or something. This has
been a specific interest of mine that I haven't been able to do much with
over the cold season since most of my motor stuff is in a garage and a
shop without heat. Just waiting for spring.

It was said that nitrogen was GENERATED in his device?
Where?

Or was it modified? Nitrous oxide or something?

Allotropic nitrogen has been used as an energy source in a contained
rotor/magnet setup. There is more to nitrogen than is spelled out in
conventional science.

It make no sense to say it takes 3600W to split 1 liter of water without stating how long you input that effect. Take care of the units.

If your technology is sound and correct, why don't you just tell us.

If you are bound by NDAs so you really can't tell anything, your numerous posts are just waste of other members time.

I don't see the point in insulting opponents while explaining your stuff. Solid arguments will do.

So please stop insulting other members. If you continue this behavior, I will consider you a troublemaker not having the same goal as the rest of us.

It would also look better if you took the effort to spell Aaron's name correctly.

Can you explain how the technology can be a gift, when you ask for money. "Technology for sale" sounds more correct to me.

Eric

The main interest I have for this thread is the concept of ionization of the
mixture getting burned.

I have been intrigued by this concept for a long time - 10 years ago,
someone I knew used to tour with Meyer and mentioned something about
this but I had no idea what he was talking about.

Also, I met someone with a certain type of pump that took in waste
gases, didn't matter what kind, there were multiple stages of high
voltage plasma processes and in the end stage, the gas was "modified"
in some way that the final plasma burst burned everything. There was no
carbon monoxide, no nox, no hydrocarbon particulates, just clean air,
which I'm sure had oxygen, co2, nitrogen and whatever other trace
gasses. The intended application was to be used to clean waste gases
at the industrial level.

One friend in Idaho created a very large plasma method for treating
waste water. He said plasma but at the time, I thought it was just a
simple high capacitance discharge into the water. The main application
for this particular one was simply to kill bacteria, etc... in waste water -
large volumes of water all at once. Not related to combustion but
just another plasma technology in my head.

Of course when I saw Luc's diode deal, I saw what I thought was the
easiest way to create the plasma - for releasing everything in the
combustion chamber - and possibly burning water fuel, which of course
it seemed was Luc's goal trying to get S1R's deal to work. And I saw
a connection to its method to the Gray motor, another plasma technology.

Anyway, chemistry isn't my forte but I can see obvious patterns to
successes on different "overly efficient" combustion processes. Plasma
has always been a part of it - for a few genres of technologies at least.

I'd like to keep the topic on focus about ionization of the mixtures -
before combustion chamber and possibly in the combustion chamber.

H1 is more powerful than h2. How to keep h1 from forming diatomic
hydrogen so we can experience its power during combustion? I suppose
creating it and introducing it as close as possible to combustion. But how
to produce enough h1?

Anyway, I'm interested in this copper tube gas processor. That seems
to be very key to the process. I don't know if copper is significant or
is just convenient.

----------------------------------------------------------

What is this?
YouTube - esperimento idrogeno

Obviously a water spark circuit. Looks like battery powered inverter
with ac output using 3 bulbs for current restriction? Caps right on
bridge maybe in parallel with plug? No hv source or is there? Is that
for ignition in the combustion chamber?

Stans stuff for sale?

YouTube - Stan Meyers Estate Water Fuel Cell #1

YouTube - Stan Meyers Estate Water Fuel Cell #2

YouTube - Stan Meyers Estate Water Fuel Cell #3


Shamelessly taken from;
All of Stanley Meyer's Equipment FOUND Including Dune Buggy! (Videos Here)

Dave

Interesting on the Stan Meyer stuff.... doesn't sound like it is for sale.
They say they're looking for backing.

Record the vids while you can.

Anyway,

I found a few comments online at this site that I would ask here:

"...how exactly are you combusting an ionized gas? Moreover, wouldn’t it require a very large input of energy to ionize the hydroxy gas? How do you keep this high energy gas from simply reigniting early?"

Residential Water Fuel Cell Energy System (1 of 2) | Perfect System

Is the ionization of air only or air + hho. If it is air only, that's one thing
if air + hho mix that is getting ionized in a gas processor, that is another.
And if air + hho being ionized together at same time, how does it not
ignite when being ionized?

Then there is this on the same page:

"It’s jsut a matter of coming up with a good heat exchanger, and it looks like cooper is the key, jsut keep the flame from touching it.
We’re not only talking about an ionized plasma, it’s a composisiton of diatomic & monatomic hydrogen and oxygen. (listen to George Wiseman’s description). You have to explain the net gain in energy & ZPE is it!"

I left the wrong spelling in to keep it original, but he says:
1. Heat exchanger
2. Copper is key (I'm sure he didn't spell copper correctly and spelled cooper)
3. There is both h1 and h2 + oxygen in the ionized mix.

But how to ionize without igniting? Is the air providing enough hydrogen
to have h1 in the mix? Or does the hho cell do that?

There are some other good questions/comments in there.

"Meyers WFC was nothing to do with energy from the vacuum you said it yourself it was the EEC, think about it if you burn of electrons from oxygen it is no longer an atom as such, it is an ion, hydrogen can not bond with an ion due to electrical charge imbalance, (they are both positive at this point) hence the water molecule is dissociated, at least thats my understanding of it good theory though Matt"

Their "quasiturbine" looks like a 4 point wankle. And
that was just a drawing. Of course that website shows only a concept,
but... Anyway, if they think it can't work, the all intake gases can be
pressurized with a turbo or other pump to feed to intake. I'm not implying
this is the same as anything in the video, just that it does make sense
to do it that way.

I've seen 13b's do over 600 hp street racing in Japan on regular gas
pump gas... well octane there is 96-100, but still gas pump gas. And,
they can be wrapped out to 11,000+ rpm or more. Apex seals should be
same material as space shuttle o-rings...can't remember the material
right now but withstands high compression and oil leakage, which the
stock seals are prone to doing. There are a lot of benefits to rotaries.
Of course I'm talking about the old Mazda rotaries. Imagine a 13b
with peri port TD08 turbo!!! LSD on the backend... NUTS!

Anyway, I find it curious that EVERY SINGLE POST on that website
are the EXACT SAME date and time! lol

In either case, they brought up the exact questions I'm thinking.

He is suggesting using copper as a heat exchanger.

What is the difference of ionization with other method?

Do gas appear in between cell (not at cell surface) is ionization or resonance?

It is interesting that to increase George wiseman water torch output, one should buy capacitor upgrade.

Hi everybody!


Aaron,
thanks for all your questions in this thread. Many of them I have had in mind for long time, too.

Hope, we will get some answers from none NDA people.



rosco1, tutanka,
are you located in Italy?



Beside the ionization, I guess, we should take care of producing H1-Atoms prefered to H2-Molecules. In Occult Ether Pysics, William Lyne describes his Atomic Hydrogen Furnance. On page 103 he gives an (alternative) way to produce H1. Lyne refers to Langmuir back in 1912, who said that lead amalgam cathode produced nascent (atomic) hydrogen. Lyne makes a sketch of an electrolysis cell with lead amalgam cathode, and H1 on it. Thats all.

Did some research on Langmuir and lead amalgam, but not very succesful.

On the other hand, I am sure in case of Daniel Dingle, his percentage amount of H1 atoms vs. H2 molecules must be relative high.

And what kind of electrode is he using? He uses lead-acid-batteries (as far as I know). They contain of lead and lead-oxide electrodes.

Question is, how to get Hg on a lead electrode?

And what are the healthy risks using Hg?


Regards
MagnetO

Hopefully a browns gas welder pro here can answer that. I remember
it was reported that bubbles come from the very center. Even if that
is true, what does it mean and can that be applied to something useful
for our purposes?

My feeling is that a turbo on a rotary like a Wankel
rotary isn't suited for this application of compressing the air intake.
That works on acceleration. And whether it is a rotary, piston, whatever,
any concept still has it's air intake part of the cycle...

But with a belt driven pump, like a supercharger, there is consistent
pressure proportionate of course to other factors. I feel its necessary
to maintain pressure at all times and a turbo wouldn't cut it.

There is too much lag in the turbo. There are multiple tricks to cut the
lag in a turbo, but they're irrelevant I think.

Just stick to a compressor regulated by rpm (belt) or whatever.
This is just my opinion of course based on my perception of what has
been shared in Energetic Forum.

Anyway, in the past I have had magnets in a certain configuration on
fuel lines with N charge and then put S charge on air intake. My thought
was when they come together they homogenize very efficiently by being
attracted to each other magnetically.

It seems the same is done with the fuel but electrically. Air and Water.

Anyway, what temperature should this mixture get to when compressed
in a typical generator engine with 1 piston? I don't know the compression.
I can look it up, but I'm sure it isn't that high. It would be a shame if
this can't work well in an off the shelf genset (generator).

Its possible to shave the head and dome the pistons for higher
compression but that defeats the purpose of using off the shelf
stuff.

Tutanka,

I am NOT trying to prevent you from sharing your views in H2OPower's
Meyer thread.

You said you have nda so can't do your own thread, that's fine. This is
my thread and I'm dedicating it to what you mentioned in the last few
days. It struck a chord with me because you're mentioning things that
agree with much of what I've gathered without having a background
in the chemistry.

Again - there isn't anything discussed here that you haven't mentioned
in the Stanley Meyer Explained thread so obviously all your help there
you have chosen to place in the public domain.

I've considered ozone and nos from nitrogen since it is what makes up
most of the air for many years but I don't have the means to test most
of what I want to do so I have to stick to simple experiments. I've
considered opposite charges of air and water like air and gasoline can be
oppositely magnetically charged for a little gain in having a more
homogeneous mixture. But of course electrical opposites for the
parts of the fuel.

Also, it is 339am and for the first time yesterday, I found that you have
been posting about this in the Stan Meyer's thread since March of last
year. lol

I apologize for asking questions about things you have already answered
multiple times. I'm up so late because I just read through the entire
Stan Meyer thread to see what you have been posting - your posts
are all new to me! Anyway, you're speaking my language and I have to
thank you big time because you're putting into words a lot of the concepts
that I have been trying to verbalize but hard without chemistry background.

Anyway, I just spent HOURS pouring through your posts in that thread.

I don't have the background to design a custom engine and am hoping
to see this technology applied to an off the shelf generator. Do you think
that is a waste of time or do you think a 5kw generator could generate
enough from water to supply a few kw's?

If a custom engine is needed to make it practical, then there isn't much
hope for the experimenters because not everyone can machine out an
engine.

Your perspective vibes with me. It's 4am and I have to sleep and let it
gel in my mind but a summary shouldn't be very lengthy to summarize
the basic principles of what you have shared that I think just plain makes
sense.

I learned a lot from the other threads and have done a lot of tests in the
past but you gave me some clarity to see the final touches.

HI Aaron,
Rotary engine that you have see in video in fact is an two stroke engine with 7 active phases each 360°. The size of engine is 150cc, have 7 pistons and these works axially obtaining more HP. I attach an photo for your reference.. This engine can be used for more application. Now I'm working to modify that adding valves but maintan every 7 active phases. However I think that ... water is our life.. oxygen is our life.. petrol it has been accidentally found. even if we had not found it today we would use water. At today more peoples,if not all, are oriented to create water gas, or brown gas, or HHO... In all case our minds are educated to burn.. and water gas is the same for us must be burned.. I believe that we must watch beyond. I have studied more the thing and at today I can assert that meyer he has been what he has comprised a lot but in all the cases not creed that it has intentional to make to understand this that it had uncovered. The data contained in the patents have been stirred like a bunch from poker. Mther nature it has given to all the necessary elements to us and they must be stirred entirety like a bunch from poker.

Thanks Tutanka!

I copy and pasted all your posts from the Stanley Meyer Explained thread
into a document. EVERY post. It is 97 pages long and I'm talking about
ONLY your posts!

Anyway, I hope to see others in this thread paraphrasing your concepts
to validate their/my understanding of what you're saying and then some
experiments.

You've been generous with your sharing and I wish I would have seen
your posts since last March! lol

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Anyway, I'd recommend anyone that is interested in this to do the same
and take a second or third look at what Alex is saying. Copy his posts
and look at the consistent thread of logic he is saying.

There are diagrams, concepts, etc... shouldn't be too hard for anyone
to make a simple block diagram with the sequence of events and the
parts to do it.

If anyone wants to discuss other ideas about ionization, feel free to start
a new thread. The purpose of this one is really to focus on the very
specific methodology that Alex is involved with.

done . Keep sharing Tutanka . Creating an engine is no small feat.

Some idea for your water processor is how about utilizing orgone accumulator (like mentioned in other thread) and some air turbulance inside it (Viktor schauberger way)?

There are document about orgone accumulator with perforated baffle inside can increase air explosiveness in an ICE. And there are application to made turbulance in throttle body that can increase engine hp (gadgetman groove).