I'm starting this thread because I recently learned of Dr. Stiffler's
slow burning water circuit/method...

YouTube - Can Water be Burned
YouTube - Can Water be Burned #2
YouTube - Can Water be Burned #3 (slow burning water)

Pages 28-31 seems to have details on this:
http://www.panaceauniversity.org/Spa... Stiffler.pdf

It is very significant to be able to burn water slowly. That means you're
not getting a fast quick HHO pop, you're actually getting thermal energy
release from the hydrogen that can make some real heat. This could heat
hot water in a tank, cook some scrambled eggs, or anything else that
a natural gas flame could do.

I saw mention of sodium chloride or magnesium oxide but am not sure if
that is applicable to those 3 youtube vids above. I need to read that
doc in detail, but anyway... slow burning water flame - very important.

The claims of success in water powered engines as in the Ionization &
Water Fuel thread and similar results are possible because of oxygen
being prevented from recombining so quickly with hydrogen to form water,
therefore, thermal energy is able to be released in a real type of
combustion and again, not just a fast quick hho pop that does nothing.

There are other uses for plain HHO but that is not the purpose of this
thread.

Anyway, I'm interested in replicating this in the near future and hope to
see others interested because slow burning water gas flame is
very valuable.

Hi Aaron, very interesting...I hope the Doc can come in on this.

Are the anode and cathode carbon rods, also would like to know what voltage and amperage the anode and cathode run at with the SEC inline with the anode and cathode. I might try this not using the sec, I will just put a funnel in a bucket and use one of my cells with a packed tube like his with cotton and fiberglass, see what happens...I am a lil skeptical here that its actually slow burning HHO, thinking it could be that since his wick set up is wider it spreads out the HHO more acrossed it, but could be wrong. If I come back in with my face half blown off you won't laugh at me will you?...24

@Aaron
Aaron, before too many people become excited about this let me explain the status of the work and why it was stopped in the public domain.

The technology is very revolutionary and very real, but my trust in an associate in CA that was maintaining a conflict of interest caused a very bad riff in relations when I was informed that a person he was mentoring was advised by an attorney father that they would patent the work. The student was able to replicate the process and light bulbs or shall I say $$ went off in their minds.

The potential for litigation still exists and my two options were either to bury the work or rush to patent it myself, which was not possible at that time because of monetary concerns.

Yes I could have released it in the public domain, yet this opened me for the possibility of litigation in the reverse direction.

One thing that still remains in my favor and maybe future public release is that the replicator in question was/has not been able to ever determine how the LED's were implemented.

I never removed the video's as you are only the second person that ever realized the significance and potential of what is shown.

My advice for any attempted replications is a bit of chemistry and second level excitation comes into play. The first video's one sees the LED's, although they are not seen on the final video.

My position is if needed I will patent or contest, but as to date this has not seemed necessary and as with the weather an hour can make all the difference in making a good or bad day.

Hi Doc....I was taught by a guy who did his own patent work without the use of an attorney, very smart guy by the way. Anyway he stated in his course that once you release the information of a device to the public either in written form or otherwise you have two years to file, or it become public domain if you like it or not. So what his method was, was to file for the patent along with the fee knowing it would be rejected upon first inspection by patent office. He was not concerned with this as he could now say legally it was "Patent Pending"...notifying the public you filed. Then after the rejection and reasons for it he had so many days to respond to keep the process going until he had made the changes they required to satisfy the patent commissioners. Now here was the most interesting part of his method. In the event you were sent notice by certified mail of "Letters Patent" or your success of a patent, he at that stage would NOT sign for it...thereby leaving it as PATENT PENDING. Now you may ask why he decided it was a stronger position than actually getting Letters Patent status. The reason he gave was that a Patent Pending is sealed...and no one can get a copy of what your claims were, he went on to state that Coca Cola was patent pending for over 75 years which made it impossible for anyone to find out the recipe and duplicate it. Anyway I thought it was brilliant on his part. Also as a side note copyrights are the strongest position one can own, as patents only give you the right to sue, copyright infringements are enforced by the FBI.

Good Day....24

Dr. Stiffler,

Thanks for the input on that. Too bad some people's issues get
in the way of progress.

If you need this thread removed at anytime because of it, just let me know.

It was a very knowledgeable member of this forum that pointed your video
out to me - wish I had seen it sooner.

@1NRG24Seven
I further realize that a Patent is only worth the funds you have to defend it and this I have experienced as I was lucky enough to have a grandfather that was a very good inventor that was ripped off from all he developed by individuals that felt theft was a better income than honest work. In the US my grandfather was the inventor of a number of patents, of which the following was for the crook a multimillion dollar device.

OUTLET BOX WALL AND CABLE CLAMP - Google Patent Search

Anyway my concern is I am unable to defend to any large extent a suit against me, that is why I must be careful here as it was replicated in a partial form, at least to where a small sustained flame was obtained from an exciter configuration.

Thans for the info.

@Aaron

I don't think that will be needed, indeed a few other replicators were very close and may be on this forum under some acronym I am not aware of. I just at this time will not offer help myself in the replication attempts.

You may see from another post I just made that I am from your area, like 16 miles West, little college town when I lived there. Left Spokane when I was 37 and moved to Hawaii. Loved the fishing and cabin we had on Newman.

Not sure if it helps.

The flame may be similar.

YouTube - Salt Water into Fuel part 2

How can that be? If you do searches at the US Patent Office online, you can find oodles of patent applications which have not yet been approved as patents, so are therefore patents pending approval.

Hi Rosco,

I thought the same thing when I noticed this thread, although as I remember the method in that video was to use high frequency radio waves.

Wow, "inventors" from Cheney Washington. 25 minutes from me.

Hi there Rick,

While I've been quite heavily involved with that "other" project for a long time now, I do try to keep my eyes open for similarly interesting material wherever possible.

I haven't really looked into this topic as such, but did find the flame colour to be similar. It appears to be a much more rapid flame though.

Interesting...

That patent location was the first thing that stuck out at me!

Seeing how cold it is here in the winter, I'd rather be in Hawaii now too

I wish ALL the applications were easy to get online. I think the database
only goes back to 2002 or something for applications.

Patents go back quite a bit though.

Rick now that you mention it I believe Slick Willie changed the rules during his presidency, which was fought tooth and nail by many inventors to no avail, so you may be right they may have changed the rules. Just one more way the ruling class can get one over on the small guy.

I remember when that came on the news - he was looking for a cancer
treatment or something.

I think I saw reference to Kanzius in the Panacea doc I posted a link to.

I thought it was interesting originally but didn't think of doing anything
with it because he was using xrays or something. Anyway, I think that
that Dr. Stiffler's vids and that Panacea doc might have enough to get
in the ballpark anyway to do the slow burning flame.

Having said that I would like people to take note that Thomas Edison eventually stopped filling patents and figured it was a waste of time, as do I. I believe the way is open source and release it to the world so NO ONE can own it, and NO ONE can stop it....make it public domain....24

Doc....as long as you can show you released information to the public in the form of you tube or here they have no claim to a patent as far as I can see. Its against the law to claim your the inventor unless you can prove your idea preceeds what was in public. Now you can claim a design patent as improvements on pryor art, but not claim you invented the art, so think you should be safe.....24

If you mix in the electrolyte a very small amount of water when you turn on the electrolyzer it will sustain a flame like the one in the video and you will note from the odor that is not the alcohol burning. A very big flame can be sustained. If you want i can make a small video to show you. but is exactly as i said.

Who of you never heard about meyer adding v e r y few % of alcohol for anti-freezing?


It becomes a gas. I maintained the flame directly over the water for more than 20 min with few drops of alcohol when i did this test.

@rosco1

The color is from a combination of sodium chloride and a touch of magnesium.

Dr. K. was using sodium chloride and a chemical that was not published. The generator was about 300W at microwave frequencies, if that helps. My system uses less than two watts.

Hi Aaron,

I note that with the tissue wick, it auto-ignited at .50 seconds into the video, yet later, without the tissue wick, he had to manually ignite it.

At least it appears that way.

Many thanks DrStiffler,

When I get some free time, I may just look at this stuff a little more closely.

Not sure why, but I'm finding it to be of interest.

Sometimes we see things which don't immediately register a hit, but later on, when looking at something else, we then manage to put the 2 and 2 together....

Interesting stuff, thanks again.


Regards.

WOW...I was just thinking my camper trailer has an electric/propane type refrigerator in it and I bet the flame isn't as big as yours that it runs off when using propane....I'm now dreaming of a Doc Stiffler refrigeration addition, you really need to get a sustained flame here maybe double up on the SEC circuit because even at 4 watts that has to be less then the cost of propane to do the same thing, and you need to test if the flame characteristics are like HHO flame in that it heats whatever material to its melting point. At least in a forced flame...here the flame is more gentle but still might heat better than regular propane, Propane only has half the BTU value per gallon over heating oil.....great work Doc....24

Dear Doc,

Allow me humbly to mention that I did notice, and I did show your videos at a 4 hour lecture/demonstration I did for a small group a week ago.

As I'm still a newbie, I have not got to try the burn experiments myself, still much to learn. By the way your optical coherence is at least as important IMO. That is a mystery to me that so few apparently picked that up long ago.

Up to the lecture I spent a week experimenting with my SEC cubes.

I leaned that the SECRPTs tuning LEDs went broke one by one, so I replaced them with 100mA types. Also I got a setup where the consumption decreased when I increased the load.

Under the demonstration I did 0.4W in 24 LEDs and lit 4 CFLs. The total length lit in the CFLs was greater than 2 meters. The consumption of the single powered SECTWR was less than 0.5W. There was 2 SECRPTs and a STWR also. The SECTWR was not connected with wires to the other towers.

So the second level excitation is certainly something to look at. I have studied your video where you light the big neon with great pressure. Like the burning water, that's also very impressing, Thank you for sharing.

Eric

Hi guys, just thought I'd add that a great way to prove ownership of an idea is to post it (disks, printouts) to yourself.

The post office stamp the date, and that gives you some federal protection. I did that with the book I wrote.

Yep Inquorate, that is what we call here a Kitchen Copyright....24

Just a quick note

When I experimented with SEC15 doing electrolysis I constantly had bubbles floating to the top and some mist floating to the bottom. It was also mentioned in one of the Doc's videos. I'm thinking of going back to those experiments, only now I think I'll implement that sticky aluminum tape we used to put on our batteries...

ABC

That is a good idea and many banks have employees that are public notaries
and they notarize paperwork for free - if you have an account. So print
it out, go get a free notary (they record it in their book with date and
description) and then make a copies and mail it to a few trusted people.
Tell them not to open it but just store it. They can be willingly subpoenaed
if needed at a later time.

Then you'll have personal record, you'll have friends that received copies
of your notarized copy and the notary public will also have a record in
their book of the notarization. And of course anything mailed will have the
postal stamp with date.

Nice work Dr Stiffler over there! You clearly show that with SEC electrolysis is just another efficient feat.

By the way... can you share some infor about the optically induced coherence ?
I am interested in it a lot and you have maintained the video.

Thanks

Hi Aaron

Yes the best is a Notary, this is what I do here in Spain after the fiasco of my patent costing some 23000 to get apart from ongoing fees. I use two, one posts to the other, just incase one is got at! I file on nearly a weekly basis with every scrap of paper etc.

@Dr. Stiffler

Well done on the flame set up, I have noticed too the strange light at the base of the flame and its movement. I use an UV FL of a specific frequency in the UV band as an exciter, one wire connection to FL immersed in the water. This is some current work that I am doing at the moment on a new gas generating cell, we will see in the near future if it works out well or not and I am not prepared to open source this just yet.

Mike