Stanley Meyer Explained

[h20power]

How N2O is made:

From here: Nitrous oxide - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Manufacture

So if what was said is true then there is a whole new way to make N2O and nobel prize should be given right away. Science shows that the two atoms don't come together like that, what will be formed first is NO at around 750-950 degrees C then that can break down into N2O. But if you get the temps up the high it will be 250 C past hydrogens flash point and any hydrogen in the system will pop off no waiting for any controled spark from any source.

My main point is Nitrogen and Oxygen don't seem to come together in this fassion but Hydrogen and Oxygen does. But if it does then come together like this a full peir review paper should be made of the reaction so other scientist can duplicate the reaction. On one hand you have a hydrogen + oxygen reaction and the other you have nitrogen + oxygen reaction and as far as I can tell the later can't combine like that. The hydrogen reaction one of the oxygen atoms has been striped of electrons and is highly reactive far more so than the O2 floating around in the system.

In an internal combustion engine you don't want any hot spots when hydrogen is present for anything over 500 degrees C will make hydrogen flash at the point of the hot spot. If your running a diesel then you need to directly inject the hydrogen into the combustion chamber and the rapid compression will reach hydrogens flash point during compression, but it has to also be kept down from hydrogens flash point. If any spot in the intake system reaches hydrogens flashpoint it will set off the reaction so great care must be made to keep the intake system below hydrogens flash point.



h2opower.

[sebosfato]

Hello guys i'm here just to invite you to really understand what stanley meyer was all about I created my own thread peace

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/4617-stanley-meyer-true.html

[Joit]

One design is better than some words.. This is my right scenario

Good enough for your own Thread.
Or are you scared about doing all the Maths and sproading to much Infos about it? Instead bringing confusion in here.
I am still not really at the Hho Stuff, but i am still waiting for the Results from h2Opower,
till he did replicate it close as it is possible, i still know few more Peoples,
what try to allready build it, but dont have the necessary Infos.
And all what i can read from you and few others is only messing this Thread here.

When your method is even only a little different from Stanley Meyer,
then it doesnt belong into this Thread here, and need a own Thread.

[tutanka]

One design is better than some words.. This is my right scenario

[h20power]

Thanks bussi04,

Now if your intending to convert a diesel engine this video can help a lot: YouTube - Water Manipulation Motor - the details (2 of 2)

Now how it works is by the rapid compression of air reaching a tempreture of 500 degrees C the autoignition point of hydrogen. You will have to fully remake some injectors for most diesel injectors will not flow water in them without burning up, but you might find some that will work as in the CIS systems. Then adding SM technology to the mix being controled by the pressure/RPM sensors for the VIC controler for the injectors and the gas processor VIC controler. The injectors will have to have a voltage zone of .25-1.0 inches, the center electron should be negetive and coated with glass so the water still picks up an strong impage charge to the point of breaking down the water molecule and exhaust gases should also feed through the injectors to push out the water mist through the injectors (but might not be needed futher testings will only tell).

I have been a mechanic for over 20 years, I have an oscilloscope, high voltage meters, lathes, and other needed machinery, AutoCAD 2007 for prototyping, and a good math, physic, and chemistry background as well as Architecture, drafting, and strength in materials knowledge.

So, if your going for a diesel engine I will help if I can, and hope I have already helped in some way.


h2opower.

[Oneminde]

Welcome bussi04

There is truth to you responce and good points from a newcomer, new inputs is always good. And yes, this is not a small project.

As an exempel, i put forth ideas about using UV-C in the GP and that is on the edge of what this tread can swallow, but since it is in line of ionization it is okey. What Tutanka is puthing forth is new ideas and new concepts for the gas that is beeng used - i am not saing that it is wrong or out of order, i am very interested in following that line of thinking, after all the air is made up of 78% N2 and only 16% O2 so.. therefor, he have a point.

It is in Tutankas interest to make he's own tread or advance this one, i am not the person to dictate if he should or should not move over to a new tread whit he's info, no matter what, i am interested in such information so the knowledge is welcome.

And whit that i post an interesting article on wiki - self ionization of water, can be interesting to read.. maybe -information that is usible... maybe
Self-ionization of water - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[bussi04]

GP is in fact is an oxidant generator synthesizes oxidants from earths atmosphere, which consists of 78% Nitrogen, 20% Oxygen, and other trace gases.
As I have esposed, and now I'm sure, the thermal explosive energy is reached simple with Nitrous Oxide and Ozone molecules. Into Meyer Gas Processor are present two fields, HV and Photon field. I have read some papers and analized all infomations, I think there are some mistaken about that.
I think Meyer GP work with EM field and UV field.
But... for obtain functional oxidant generator for engine you need an large flux of gas inside and this is proportional to energy added into GP because preparation of Nitrous Oxide (N2O) and ozone (O3) depend from pressure of earths atmosphere for obtain an large flow of N2O and O3. In this way for obtain more reactans need more energy for accelrate flux to inject inside engine. For it I'm building new Gas Processor that use magnetron and UV fields. In this way I obtain N2O and O3 but in large amount. Regards

[h20power]

This is my mathmatical hypotheses as to what is going on in the water for fuel technology put forth by Stanley Meyer's.

(Processed air gases focausing on oxygen) O2 + H2O(atomized)→ 2 H + O + O(highly reactive oxygen from the GP & EEC missing electrons) → H2O

The math that goes with it at the 4th energy level:
2 H-H bonds 872 kJ/mol and 1 O=O bond 7469.2 kJ/mol are formed yielding 8341.2 kJ/mol. The net sum of the reaction (4 H-O 459 kJ/mol bonds are broken taking 1836 kJ/mol) now is 8341.2-1836 = +6505.2 kJ/mol



This reaction is exothermic, the reaction with N2 would be endothermic but I leave that for tutanka to show. For most new hypotheses have room for improvement and though I am close to testing this on a cars engine I still need to build a few things and the funding is coming from my own pocket so it takes time to get things done. As for why I will nolonger talk to him it's personal, and should serve as a clear example to anyone that truly gets on my bad side. Now if anyone feels there is need for improovement by all means fire away, but do so in a way I and others can understand the scientific method.


h2opower.

I'll will be using this hypotheses for it shows enough energy content to run a cars engine. All of my testing revoles around this mathmatical model, why? it's something you can sink your teeth into and water is needed just like Stanely Meyer's. I too need the hydrogen though for the most part as an energy carrier, but without water nothing will work. I have a plan and I am sticking to it. I am following the scientific method as we all should be anyone that doesn't can not be followed and/or trusted. My hypotheses revolves around the use of water as a source of fuel, same as Stanely Meyer's patents for it is following his patents. If your going to say Nitrogen and Oxygen is a source of fuel you need to make a new thread and explain away. This thread is for the use of water as a source of fuel following the steps of Stanley Meyer's, not Nitrogen. Can someone out there back me up or am I way off base?

Energy independence is where I am headed and I gave a working mathmatical model for all test to be conducted in that aim. If anyone is to add or subtract from the hypotheses let them do so with another mathmatical model to replace this one and that model best have the use of water as the fuel source, if not it is not following the works of Stanley Meyers. I rest my case.


h2opower.

[tutanka]

GP is in fact is an oxidant generator synthesizes oxidants from earths atmosphere, which consists of 78% Nitrogen, 20% Oxygen, and other trace gases.
As I have esposed, and now I'm sure, the thermal explosive energy is reached simple with Nitrous Oxide and Ozone molecules. Into Meyer Gas Processor are present two fields, HV and Photon field. I have read some papers and analized all infomations, I think there are some mistaken about that.
I think Meyer GP work with EM field and UV field.
But... for obtain functional oxidant generator for engine you need an large flux of gas inside and this is proportional to energy added into GP because preparation of Nitrous Oxide (N2O) and ozone (O3) depend from pressure of earths atmosphere for obtain an large flow of N2O and O3. In this way for obtain more reactans need more energy for accelrate flux to inject inside engine. For it I'm building new Gas Processor that use magnetron and UV fields. In this way I obtain N2O and O3 but in large amount. Regards

[tutanka]

HI H2opower,
I remember to all that into GP reacts N2 and O2 not hydrogen. In this way laser injection and HV field injection can start some reactions inside GP but not only O2 molecule but also on N2 molecule. If the process is mistaken you can obtain bad gasin output as NO and NO2. Is very important understand stechiometric relationship from N2 (78%) and O2 (16%).. this means also that if you need an large amount of oxygen you need pressure into GP. Isvey important know he complete reactions inside GP.. isn't sufficient copy an design and add Led's or an Hv field. Reactions inside GP can be very dangerous for your life for it I suggest you to control GP with an gas analyzer in close ambient. Regards

[h20power]

VIC transformer just about done:




Now moving forwards with the all the rest I have to get done.


h2opower.

[h20power]

This is my mathmatical hypotheses as to what is going on in the water for fuel technology put forth by Stanley Meyer's.

(Processed air gases focausing on oxygen) O2 + H2O(atomized)→ 2 H + O + O(highly reactive oxygen from the GP & EEC missing electrons) → H2O

The math that goes with it at the 4th energy level:
2 H-H bonds 872 kJ/mol and 1 O=O bond 7469.2 kJ/mol are formed yielding 8341.2 kJ/mol. The net sum of the reaction (4 H-O 459 kJ/mol bonds are broken taking 1836 kJ/mol) now is 8341.2-1836 = +6505.2 kJ/mol

Non-sequential ionization

When the fact that the electric field of light is an alternating electric field is combined with tunnel ionization, the phenomenon of non-sequential ionization emerges. An electron that tunnels out from an atom or molecule may be sent right back in by the alternating field, at which point it can either recombine with the atom or molecule and release any excess energy, or it also has the chance to further ionize the atom or molecule through high energy collisions. This additional ionization is referred to as non-sequential ionization for two reasons: one, there is no order to how the second electron is removed, and two, an atom or molecule with a +2 charge can be created straight from an atom or molecule with a neutral charge, so the integer charges are not sequential. Non-sequential ionization is often studied at lower laser-field intensities, since most ionization events are sequential when the ionization rate is high.

This reaction is exothermic, the reaction with N2 would be endothermic but I leave that for tutanka to show. For most new hypotheses have room for improvement and though I am close to testing this on a cars engine I still need to build a few things and the funding is coming from my own pocket so it takes time to get things done. As for why I will nolonger talk to him it's personal, and should serve as a clear example to anyone that truly gets on my bad side. Now if anyone feels there is need for improovement by all means fire away, but do so in a way I and others can understand the scientific method.


h2opower.

[Oneminde]

even though I now refuse to talk to him I will look at what he has to say

h2opower, what are you smoking?
How can you refuse to talk to him if you want to study what he have put forth?

[h20power]

Everything exist in reality comes from belief. Belief does not directly bring out reality, but it go through a middle man call logic. If you go back 300 years ago and say that "with a touch of your feet, you can get 5 tons of weight moving at 60mph". That is rediculously absurd, but since people believe in it, they start put together tires, springs, engine, and make it possible. The hard work of logic and make it work is the middle man. People can claim anything they want and it is indeed possible, but are you going to put effort to bring it out to reality is another thing. Stanley Meyer doesn't make this invention from a pure belief though it is his guidance. He has logic in his head of how the whole thing works and he made it through hardwork. His math and logic might not be understood by others, but he did not get it based on luck . You have made the math clearly understood to yourself, it means that your chance of making it works has increased significantly and possibly make it works on the first few try, however, it is not easy for someone else to see exactly what you see. Remember, everything in this world can never be right... and can never be wrong.

I don't agree with that for one minute, American Indians observed the animals around them to know what was safe to eat. Everything around you is due to someone observations, they try a new drug by giving it to you and observing what happens. You seemed to not understand the differance of a belief system and a system of obervations and predictions by way of trial an error and the theories that suround them. In the quoted page if you read it they give this example of how a belief messes everything up.

Needham's Science and Civilization in China uses the 'flying horse' image as an example of observation: in it, a horse's legs are depicted as splayed, when the stop-action picture by Eadweard Muybridge shows otherwise. Note that at the moment that no hoof is touching the ground, the horse's legs are gathered together and are not splayed, but for when a horse is jumping. Earlier paintings depict the incorrect flying horse observation.

This demonstrates Ludwik Fleck's caution that people observe what they expect to observe, until shown otherwise; our beliefs will affect our observations (and therefore our subsequent actions). The purpose of the scientific method is to test a hypothesis, a proposed explanation about how things are, via repeatable experimental observations which can contradict the hypothesis so as to fight this observer bias.

You have to look at it to tell what they are talking about with the horse's legs. I have been attacked just like Galileo I am saying that the world is not flat, which is something that is wrong to think that the world is flat, and that the world is in the center of the solar system. Those are things that are wrong for the world is the third planet in our solar system and the world is indeed not flat but round. But the belief system held at the time put a man under house arrest for the rest of his life. People die much more over beliefs than they do over observations. When people observed people from other walks of life they found that they where not evil as the beliefs of the time said they where. The failur to look, listen, and learn has caused the deaths of many people, example Iraq. Over one million people dead, and now it is clear that explosives where planted in all three towers that fell that day. But right now beliefs seem to be spliting the nation in two, between those that belive the lie, and those that belive science and CSI evidence.

It's the same with the use of water as a fuel source, it is widely belived that it can not be used as a fuel source. So with that belief in hand they go forth and stamp out anyone saying anything differently. They also will not observe the true nature of water for they feel or belive they already know everything they need to know already and nothing new will come from looking at it again. I myself have been attacked by people that belive the Water Fuel Capacitor is all you need, and that there is magic in the VIC transformer, as well as the scientific community with all of there income/funding coming from the energy supplyers of the world. I have had to endure two groups of attackers ever since I started this line of thought. I understand the value of science so I pressed on and set out to make a mathmatical model that shows where the energy content comes from. I ran bucks of expirements on just about everything dealing with Stanley Meyer's work aswell as some on others, like Bob Boyce, Daniel Dingel, and more. I built the VIC transformer long before the bobbins of Stanley Meyer's VIC came out for everyone to view. I already new how they worked and how to build them when people where just starting out on it. The last things I learned on Stanley Meyer's technology was the importance of the electron extraction circuit and the way the water fuel injectors truly worked.

Right now I am looking over what tutanka put out but can't find a mathmatical model to represent it as of yet. I do know that we have to keep the temps down so we don't create NO's and it seems that to make use of his theories the temps would have around 1300 degrees or more. But at those temps NO's would be created and that and N2O's are green house gases. Stanley Meyer talks about yet another gas processor on the exhuast side of the system that breaks down the NO's, N2O's and the like. So Meyer was concered with the creation of NO's, but solved the problem with another type of Gas Processor. So, even though I now refuse to talk to him I will look at what he has to say. And if he is to have his theories looked over by others he will have to make a mathmatical model that supports his theories, just like I did. Give worste case possibilities as well as best case possibilities, and the temps the said reactions can take place in. That is the right way to go about it, followed by test data, and repetability.


h2opower.

[Oneminde]

Albert Einstein ones said; "Everything is possible." What Tutanka have put forth is correct, a chemist supports he's "theory" we can call it a theory like the rest of this tread since nothing has been proven IRL yet. I have "attackt" Tutanka, but he have shown that he use he's brain and for that i am glad that he is here whit us.
H2opower - you did show me that the GP was important and still are so for that i want to thank you, but we also need to remember that we do not know everything about it and also that the GP can evolve like everything ells, it is important to not be blind and have a tunnel veiw...

So from Onemindes side - Tutanka, i am going to folow your new theory and put fort my understanding when i have something to add.

Another thing i whant to add here is that Tutanka was the only one that responded on my EM field explenation for the Capacitor (yes i know, it is not important h2opower).. but it does not matter for I know it is true and that works for me.

it is not alwasy about who is right and who is wrong or who did what, what is important is the function and the goal of our science. If someone feels that what they know is sufficiant, then that is okey to.

That was all Oneminde wanted to say today.

and everyone!