Stanley Meyer Explained

[ourbobby]

Hi there,
I know that this reply is out of date. You are quite right to state that almost nothing makes sense. This was deliberate. The Stanley Meyer device is not his invention. It belongs to a 1930's German Physicist. A development of which became the fuel cell used in the Apollo space craft.

The reason that Meyers was paranoid about showing this device to "educated" parties, was simply that this technology was understood by the Americans and the Germans and the English Physicist at the time - at the end of WW11.

There are several very important circuitry and components missing from Meyers patents - and in particular his drawings. I shall not elaborate on these. There is a similarity to this fraud as to that of the EV Gray device whereby there is a lot of hot air blowing about from alleged experts who seem to think that there exists in these exotic patents a clear pathway to replication. Nothing could be further from the truth. Especially in the case of the Gray Motor and all the expert analysis on this circuitry. So too with Meyer. I see that Meyer was once indicted for fraud!

In Meyers case, it was that he had to conceal the nature of his device because it was already in the public domain. Just as the EV Gray device was.

What Meyer has done is to isolate out, what would have been sequential steps and incorporated procedures, and, defined them as his own by constructing circuitry that does not quite work.

So we get lots of oxy stripping talk, pointed gas chambers etc. If the correct research had been done on Meyer and his device, it would become clear to Blind Freddy, what the correct procedure was.

IMHO, this thead just needs to step back, take a deep breath and start to think like a physicist might. What is evident, is that Meyers produced Hydrogen. This fact is true. Just how much.....?

Regards

[bussi04]

Hi bussi

When I look at the pdf, some of the lines are missing. I don't know how you generate the .pdf file.

With my environment I first plot a .ps file from KiCad, then I use "Gimp" to convert to .jpg. Finally I can use OpenOffice to make a document and export as a .pdf file.

If the missing lines are as I think they are, then #4 is my favorite.

We must use either a PNP or a P-channel transistor, and we can not allow the opto coupler to look into a high voltage, seen from the output opto-transistor. So no "emitter follower" configuration.

Eric

Ps. have you assembled the Christmas stuff ?

[Tecstatic]

Hi bussi

When I look at the pdf, some of the lines are missing. I don't know how you generate the .pdf file.

With my environment I first plot a .ps file from KiCad, then I use "Gimp" to convert to .jpg. Finally I can use OpenOffice to make a document and export as a .pdf file.

If the missing lines are as I think they are, then #4 is my favorite.

We must use either a PNP or a P-channel transistor, and we can not allow the opto coupler to look into a high voltage, seen from the output opto-transistor. So no "emitter follower" configuration.

Eric

Ps. have you assembled the Christmas stuff ?

[bussi04]

EEC implementation

Please note I did not question the science, what I do question is the specific use of transistors and optocouplers in figure 8B.

As bussi also says, the coupling can be made another way to obtain what we need, and with components we can buy.

When I speak of trial and error, I think of the component selection of the EEC components.

What are the requirements for voltage and amp specs for the semiconductors in the EEC circuit, that is what I'm missing so far. If this is known, please enlighten me.

The VIC transformer drive I regard no problem to make, as I'm used to make this kind of circuit.

Eric

[Tecstatic]

It's not really trail an error as I have gone over the mechanisms involved here: http://www.energeticforum.com/78515-post6.html, http://www.energeticforum.com/78559-post12.html all we need to do is follow the science.


h2opower.

Please note I did not question the science, what I do question is the specific use of transistors and optocouplers in figure 8B.

As bussi also says, the coupling can be made another way to obtain what we need, and with components we can buy.

When I speak of trial and error, I think of the component selection of the EEC components.

What are the requirements for voltage and amp specs for the semiconductors in the EEC circuit, that is what I'm missing so far. If this is known, please enlighten me.

The VIC transformer drive I regard no problem to make, as I'm used to make this kind of circuit.

Eric

[h20power]

It's not really trail an error as I have gone over the mechanisms involved here: http://www.energeticforum.com/78515-post6.html, http://www.energeticforum.com/78559-post12.html all we need to do is follow the science.


h2opower.

[bussi04]

[Tecstatic]

Thank you for the reply.

I was trying to get some info to do the dimensioning of the circuit components.

As I have mentioned before I have made a HV flyback SMPS, with 3 windings for the primary and 42 windings for the secondary.

This transformer is able to deliver up to 30kV, you can see the doc for the trafo here:

http://www.panaceauniversity.org/Tesla%27s%20HV%20impulse%20lighting%20methods-Imhotep%27s%20Radiant%20Oscillator.pdf

on page 42 and forward.

The primary have shown voltages up to 800V, approx 270V per winding.

Now take your VIC driver stage. Assuming the VIC primary behaves like my transformer, then you need an opto coupler output transistor capable of 800V. Please let me know the part number when you find one suitable for this.

On the EEC circuit, I agree that it just has to be built and observed, plain and simple trial and error to identify what is needed for correct operation. I guess nobody can (or will) tell us.

By the way this brought to my attention, that there is a relationship between the resonance frequency and the air flow.

The air flow must be sufficiently slow or the resonance frequency sufficiently high, so all air passing the grid is exposed to an extraction cycle.

Eric

[h20power]

I really don't need to draw the circuit for words in this case will do. The P-ch FET hooks up to the same power source of the positive side of the primary circuit in figure #4, then following the EEC side it then runs through the P-ch FET, then the blocking or isolation diode, then to the bulb or amp consuming device, and then to the screen mesh grid just after the Gas Processor.

Remember the moving medium this time is air, focusing on the oxygen atoms, that passes through the Gas Processor. The electrons that are stripped off will come into contact with the positive voltage of the screen mesh grid, thus completing the circuit path and emitting light in the bulb. In this case the air itself is the ground that completes the circuit path, and it is moving through the GP at a rate of 32ft/sec at idle speeds, now that's a lot of atoms if you care to add them up and 4 or more electrons per atom are to be stripped off. What we are doing is making the electronics match the science not the science match the electronics. We can't control the science just the electronics that will give us some means to control the outcome of the resulting reactions that make water as a source of fuel possible.

This same circuit is to be used with the WFI's and the WFC's as the technology for them is the same when it comes to the circuit side of the equation. The VIC transformers have to be built as I have mentioned already in this thread before. I am not sure what Dr. Stiffler is doing as I don't follow his work. I follow the science behind Stanley Meyers patents and that even means not following Stanley Meyer himself at times as his words and/or drawings sometimes don't match well with the science that I have uncovered. The moving media is the one that keeps changing from item to item in Stanley Meyers technology, in the GP the medium is air, in the WFI's the medium is atomized water mist, and in the WFC the medium is liquid water. The technology changes with the medium to suit the system as everything is done by way of capacitance same as found in nature. This technology is following mother natures lead to do some of the same things it does. Surely no one thinks of the energy a tree expends to break down the water molecule to get at the hydrogen it wants as massive amounts of energy for mother nature doesn't work that way. Our very own bodies break down the water molecule very well, but doesn't use up large amounts of energy to do so. Dr. Faraday's whole approach is in the wrong direction of natures approach, so are most of man's technologies. We like to use force when nature likes to use a passive means of persuasion. Follow the science and observe mother nature is the best way to understanding this technology.


h2opower.

[Tecstatic]

Thanks Testatic,

But this is the circuit I am going to use:

As everyone can see the EEC gets it's power from the same place as the primary of the VIC transformer and that is coming from the Darlington transistor. The alternate gate is just a 4001 so it is 180 degrees out of phase in the pulsing trains going to both circuits. The ring is just a screen mesh directly in the path of the air supply coming from the Gas Processor.

Do you have an idea of what potential we look into at the grid, do we have to regard it as a current source ?

I want to use a PNP FET for that in the EEC circuit, think that's a good idea?

I guess you mean a P-channel FET ? If yes, please post a quick sketch of the diagram idea.

But this is keeping it simple and in keeping with Meyer's KISS methodology.

What do you mean by simple ?

1. If you think of the development effort, you are right, the uController solution takes more SW effort, but less HW effort. In all probably more work for development and test.

2. If you think of just replicating a tested and working uC solution then that is the KISS solution, not the old circuitry. What you see I'm posting in the other thread, is a generic circuit for other uses as well.

All the grounding I will ignore for it doesn't follow Meyers own words of being an isolated circuit.

Hope that helps everyone see what I am doing on this,

h2opower.

I'm sorry to say the circuit you present IMHO looks like smoke from Meyer.

I see some problems:

1. The grounding, as you point out yourself.
2. The emitter follower coupling, which amplifies current but not voltage. That means your opto coupler must have the same voltage rating as the transistor used.
3. From the work with Dr.Stifflers circuits, I'm convinced the fast switching is the key to a high gain, and thus high VIC output voltage. I see the VIC transformer as a balanced exciter for the two chokes. If I'm not mistaken, the chokes should have the same spatial resonance being a multiple of the VIC transformer resonance frequency. This resonance is clearly seen in Stifflers SEC to be the very key to the cohered energy.

IMHO the purpose of the individual cavities in the VIC transformer is to reduce the internal capacitance so current is minimized and voltage is maximized.

I remember gotoluc's experiment looking like the secondary of the VIC. He used a capacitor and a relay as an exciter to switch the polarities of the "chokes". The capacitor did not loose its charge, but the AV plugs connected to the output end of the choke coils could light LEDs.

4. Seen in this perspective, it does not speed up to use the emitter follower, as it increases the capacitive load on the primary coil.

5. Until proven wrong by a working circuit, I will doubt that it is the best solution to use, and maybe it does not work at all.

Let me hear your opinion.

Eric

[h20power]

Thanks Testatic,

But this is the circuit I am going to use:

As everyone can see the EEC gets it's power from the same place as the primary of the VIC transformer and that is coming from the Darlington transistor. The alternate gate is just a 4001 so it is 180 degrees out of phase in the pulsing trains going to both circuits. The ring is just a screen mesh directly in the path of the air supply coming from the Gas Processor. I want to use a PNP FET for that in the EEC circuit, think that's a good idea? But this is keeping it simple and in keeping with Meyer's KISS methodology. All the grounding I will ignore for it doesn't follow Meyers own words of being an isolated circuit.

Hope that helps everyone see what I am doing on this,

h2opower.

[Tecstatic]

Possible optocoupler

@h20power

Your welcome, and thank you for sharing your countless hours of research

@all

Regarding the EEC I have found a possible opto coupler, the "OPI155".

I'm not stating it is inexpensive, or mechanically practical, but it is suitable for the electrical side of the solution, 50kV Isolation capability, and sufficiently fast for sub 100kHz EEC frequencies.

I still need to identify a suitable plastic fiber link for the EEC isolation. Then the isolation voltage is no issue for the opto part. I still think it will cost $$ but a fiber is much more suitable to use mechanically than the opto coupler below.

Still I have added this post if some is needing a solution right now, and have difficulties finding an opto coupler.

Digi-Key - 365-1034-ND (Manufacturer - OPI155)

Eric

[HMS-776]

Just a word to the wise.

Bob Boyce had a water car at one point. He was sued by the EPA and faced 3 years for tampering with emissions controls.

To anyone working on this, it might be best to do it on a car which does not have emissons, otherwise the same thing could happen.

YouTube - Bob Boyce 27 Years HHO Part 1

Just trying to watch out for fellow colleagues!

[h20power]

Just make sure that the FET belonging to the EEC is a PNP type for that is the flow direction that is needed for it to work.

And I'd like to say thanks to you both for all of your hard work and giving knowlege to those of us that need a hand with the circuits. The science is done just have to finish building all the needed parts and put them all together the way Meyer did for the most part with very little changes to the overall design.


h2opower.

[bussi04]

Hi bussi,

Seen from the production of the PCB, I have no more issues I stumble upon.
...
Eric