Announcement

**Farrah Day** · 04-19-2010, 08:14 PM

Hi Rosemary

In an electrolyser, the cathode supplies the electrons, hence is negative so attracts the protons. Vice-versa with the anode.

I take it then that you assumed that the cathode attracted -ve charges!

Pulsed dc works just fine, after all it's just switching dc on and off. Some people claim to get better efficiency by doing this. Why this is appears to be the case is open to debate.

AC electrolysis has been documented, but not reliably proven and is another area of great contention on these forums. As of course is Stanley Meyers, supposed dissociation of water by voltage alone.

Harvey

I would also like to see some mention of what pH really is and how it relates to this process and how it was used to prove the chemical reactions involved.

Not exactly sure what you're asking here. But I can say that you can use litmus paper to determine the proximity of the cations at the cathode and anions at the anode. The litmus paper indicates the water is more acid at the cathode and more alkaline at the anode. Can be a good indication of the whereabouts of ion concentrations.

The thing that intrigued me the most in this discussion is the valence bonding of H2 and O2. The stable ground state of Oxygen is Triplet Oxygen which is paramagnetic, but there is also a form of O2 that is less stable known as singlet oxygen which is diamagnetic.

Something I've never looked into, but some people claim that the gas produced by an electrolyser is not the more common forms of O2 and H2. Most of what I've read on the forums however, is based on nothing more than heresay - rumbles through the grapevine. Though, with all the recent talk about gas processors, you'd think someone might have mentioned these states of oxygen... wouldn't you?

Farrah

**witsend** · 04-19-2010, 08:37 PM

Originally posted by Farrah Day View Post

In an electrolyser, the cathode supplies the electrons, hence is negative so attracts the protons. Vice-versa with the anode.

Thanks Farrah.

Originally posted by Farrah Day View Post

Pulsed dc works just fine, after all it's just switching dc on and off. Some people claim to get better efficiency by doing this. Why this is appears to be the case is open to debate.

If you get the same effect with a switched current then there's a saving in the energy supply? Or does it also slow the process?

Originally posted by Farrah Day View Post

AC electrolysis has been documented, but not reliably proven and is another area of great contention on these forums. As of course is Stanley Meyers, supposed dissociation of water by voltage alone.

Would reversing the flow reverse the process in the electrolyte?

Anyway my level of knowledge here is clearly wanting. You've been very patient. Thanks Farrah.

**Farrah Day** · 04-19-2010, 10:02 PM

Rosemary

If you get the same effect with a switched current then there's a saving in the energy supply? Or does it also slow the process?

Logically you would think that the process slows as there are periods of no attraction to the electrodes. But, there might be a residual charge that keeps ions moving... and perhaps a little kinetic energy... but I'm only surmising.

However, if I'm right in my thinking, the pulsing effect of the electric field might actually enhance ionisation of the water molecule, providing a greater amount of ions to interact at the electrodes... but again, just an idea.

Would reversing the flow reverse the process in the electrolyte?

Halt it, yes. The ions don't know what day it is with the electrodes continually swapping polarities. Of course how much movement is involved depends on the frequency, but they're basically to...ing and from...ing and not much more. I can confirm that mains 240V AC 50Hz doesn't do much across the cells of a standard electrolyser in terms of getting gas evolved at the electrodes.

Farrah

**Harvey** · 04-19-2010, 10:43 PM

If electrolysis were a simple exchange of charges, then I would imagine that it would be possible to have a single electrode electrolysis device wherein that electrode functions as a cathode and anode alternately.

In such a case, it is recognized that the aqueous solution is in a general state of neutral charge. Thus by bringing the electrode to a negative charge relative to that neutral reference, it will be a cathode with respects to the solution. As the cathode supplies free electrons to the solution which cause the water to split into H+ and OH- first due to the field tension near the cathode, and then gives gives an actual electron to the H+ to make H. This must happen four times, so we give 4 electrons and we get H, H, H, H, HO-, HO-, HO-, HO-. or 4H 4HO-. The 4H join covalently into two pairs of H2, so now we have 2H2 4H0- (wish this forum had subscripts and superscripts).

This is where the timing of the electrical system becomes critical. If we leave the cathode in a negative state too long, it will push the OH- away as like charges repel. So we turn off the cathode and let it return to neutral. Again, timing is important here, because we now must allow gravity to accelerate the H2 pairs upward by pulling the neutral solution down around them so they rise. While this is occurring we wonder what the specific gravity is of the OH- . . . will it sink, stay where it is, or rise also? So we wait until the H2 escapes the electrode. (any one else thinking horizontal electrode here?). Why wait? Because we are going to flip the charge on the electrode and we do not want the H2 to be unduly influenced by it. So the timing is done, the H2 is gone and we hope that the OH- is still near the electrode.

Flip the charge on the single electrode. Now it is positive and acts as an anode. Now we can attract the 4OH- and get our four electrons back

and this gives us 4H and 4O. Two of the O join to make O2 and the other two each join with two H to may H2O. Again timing is only needed to grab those electrons and then we allow the electrode to return to neutral and we wait. We wait for the O2 to escape. (good thing Oxygen is heavier than Hydrogen or they may rejoin up there above our solution given an opportunity to oxidize - aka burn). So we get a layer of hydrogen above a layer of oxygen that can be siphoned off laterally.

Therefore, AC could be used on a single electrode. But the timing is critical.

ETA: Not applicable to the above, but it does show that some are experimenting with AC electrolysis:
Wiley InterScience :: Session Cookies

**HairBear** · 04-19-2010, 11:07 PM

As microwave ovens use an AC signal to heat water efficiently, so does a typical electrolyzer and an AC signal input. The polarity of the water molecules are vigorously shaken back and forth causing the water to heat. Efficiency can be greatly increased by tuning certain parameters of any given device. One example I can demonstrate in such a way is the use of a "Tibetan Singing Bowl" as shown in this video links below...

YouTube - tibetian singing bowl, water inside

YouTube - Charging water with Singing Bowl

YouTube - WATER SOUND IMAGES

**Harvey** · 04-20-2010, 12:06 AM

Originally posted by Farrah Day

Not exactly sure what you're asking here. But I can say that you can use litmus paper to determine the proximity of the cations at the cathode and anions at the anode. The litmus paper indicates the water is more acid at the cathode and more alkaline at the anode. Can be a good indication of the whereabouts of ion concentrations.

Yes, essentially. I did want to draw attention to the fact that pH is shorthand for 'potentiometric hydrogen ion concentration'
pH - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

and to show the close relationship electrolysis has to pH in the solution: http://web.jjay.cuny.edu/~acarpi/NSC/7-ph.htm

Just basic stuff

**Mookie** · 04-20-2010, 04:31 AM

Farrah

" However, if I'm right in my thinking, the pulsing effect of the electric field might actually enhance ionisation of the water molecule, providing a greater amount of ions to interact at the electrodes... but again, just an idea. "
..................

This is not just an idea. You are almost perfectly correct in what you have said. I truly hope that you follow thru with your experimentation with neos. It is a starting point. The simplest way to create the effect you describe, in an electrolytic cell, is with a magnetic field. Your "idea" of enhancing ionization will not occur unless your cell is under the influence of a pulsing magnetic field. You are indeed enhancing ionization...thereby accellerating the electrolysis process. Should you be sufficiently intrigued to take this one step further, you will discover what is termed "overpotential". When you actually see this happening for yourself, you will find that you have solved, at least, half of the equation and find yourself that much closer to answering your own original question. I say this from considerable experience.

I have added enough to this discussion, and will allow it to take its own direction.

.

**witsend** · 04-20-2010, 05:53 AM

Originally posted by Mookie View Post

I have added enough to this discussion, and will allow it to take its own direction.

Hi Mookie.
You seem to know so much about this. I, for one, would be sorry to see you leave the discussion. Can you perhaps tell us more about your own results using applied magnetic fields? You hint at some very clear benefits and that's what we all look for here. And somehow I take it that Farrah's on the same page as she also intends using some permanent magnets.

**Farrah Day** · 04-20-2010, 07:16 AM

Interesting, thoughtful discussion... I wish it we're always so on these forums!

Harvey

If electrolysis were a simple exchange of charges, then I would imagine that it would be possible to have a single electrode electrolysis device wherein that electrode functions as a cathode and anode alternately.

Well we do actually get this situation if you consider floating plates (some people wrongly call these neutral plates... but they are anything but neutral).

A floating plate sitting midway between and anode and cathode of pd, say 6 volts, will show a pd of 3 volts with respect to the cathode. There is no electrical connection to this floating plate other than the ions in the liquid, and you will get H2 evolving from one side of this plate and O2 the other side. The thickness of the floating plate is all that sits between the opposite charges. I love floating plates, they simply act as a charge exchange medium.

This is where the timing of the electrical system becomes critical. If we leave the cathode in a negative state too long, it will push the OH- away as like charges repel. So we turn off the cathode and let it return to neutral. Again, timing is important here, because we now must allow gravity to accelerate the H2 pairs upward by pulling the neutral solution down around them so they rise. While this is occurring we wonder what the specific gravity is of the OH- . . . will it sink, stay where it is, or rise also? So we wait until the H2 escapes the electrode. (any one else thinking horizontal electrode here?). Why wait? Because we are going to flip the charge on the electrode and we do not want the H2 to be unduly influenced by it. So the timing is done, the H2 is gone and we hope that the OH- is still near the electrode.

Personally, I tend to think that once the H2 molecule has formed, it will stay that way until it leaves the liquid environment, and as it's now a neutral molecule I can't see it being thereafter unduly influenced by charged electrodes.

Flip the charge on the single electrode. Now it is positive and acts as an anode. Now we can attract the 4OH- and get our four electrons back and this gives us 4H and 4O. Two of the O join to make O2 and the other two each join with two H to may H2O. Again timing is only needed to grab those electrons and then we allow the electrode to return to neutral and we wait. We wait for the O2 to escape. (good thing Oxygen is heavier than Hydrogen or they may rejoin up there above our solution given an opportunity to oxidize - aka burn). So we get a layer of hydrogen above a layer of oxygen that can be siphoned off laterally

Therefore, AC could be used on a single electrode. But the timing is critical. .

Interesting idea Harvey, but with a single electrode surely we do not have a complete cct, so how will current flow through the system?

Much still to be learned on this subject, and after all this time we have so many questions that remain without concise answers, which is one reason why I find the whole subject fascinating.

Mookie

Hang around awhile, you might well provide valuable insight as well as healthy conversation.

Farrah

**witsend** · 04-20-2010, 08:10 AM

Farrah, I keep going back to this - like a tongue to a sore tooth. Bear with me.

We have empirical evidence that a single battery supply source is able to discharge - then recharge - during a switching cycle. One can then assume, surely, and at it's least, that the early cycle of discharge is then reversed? Now. Given an electrolyte mix - whatever it is - discharge would result in a decoupling of the molecular bonding. Recharge would then simply re-establish that bonding. Effectively we've got a given quantity - a mix of something that essentially remains the same - the same atomic quantities and their same particulate properties - that are shuffled and reshuffled with the applied electric currents. But the molecular structures vary - depending on the directional flow of that applied current. Again. One way and it results in a decoupling of that bond, the other way and they're 'recoupled'. To my way of thinking - that's a 'closed system' courtesy electrolysis. Not perfect. Because, presumably, some of the gases may escape and some of the water may evaporate. But generally - broadly speaking, the battery itself can then be configured to run as a closed system. This is empircally evident.

So then. Let's take a simple system where a battery runs flat and we recharge it from a wall plug through your standard battery recharger. Here, unquestionably, the utility supplier will charge you for some combination of applied voltage and current - represented as wattage. Their justification? Because you've used up some of the electric energy supplied by them. In effect you've used their energy by running a current through your appliance - in this example - the 'battery'. Mainstream claim that current flow comprises electrons therefore what is transferred in current flow is electrons. Therefore - at its least - you've taken some of their electrons. But, in truth, if you have taken their electrons - then you must also have given them back. This because NO extra material - NO extra electrons have been added to the battery cells.

So now we can perhaps argue that the extra electrons have been given 'on loan' to satisfy the requirement of an applied potential difference required at the ? anode? That temporary imbalance - then acts as a catalyst to rebond to the earlier electrolytic state of the battery acid mix. But is there - in truth - any evidence of a 'flow' of electrons that then conducts through that mix? According to what you said - electrons don't of themselves flow through a liquid. It's the cationic or anionic molecules that do this. (edited) Sorry that's wrong. You explained it was ions that did this. If you were to add a whole lot of extra electrons then my guess is that the anionic molecules will far exceed the cationic and they won't simply 'reverse' the early process of discharge. They'll create new and exotic molecular forms because of that generalised electron imbalanced. But they DON'T.

So. What actually is added to the system in that recharge cycle? Absolutely nothing. If electrons have been added to the anode in that recharge, then they must have 'floated through the air back to the cathode to complete the circuit flow required to allow any current to flow. Alternatively, they must have travelled through the electrodes at some stage and then briefly through the available liquids as they jump from cell to cell - and so on. But sooner or later they must hit the cell's liquid. And then? What happens? Do they 'swim' across - in a line? You see. The explanation for any kind of charge flow based on electrons - to my mind - becomes increasingly improbable.

Farrah, I know your interest is largely in the application of this to water. But the same principle applies. You're adding a current flow - continuously. Yet the actual molecular state of those aqueous ions is dependant on a precise count - a precise ratio of balance between electrons and their atoms and the atoms in their molecular or bonded state. No extra electrons despite the actual measurable application of current flow? That's why I'm with Mookie on this. I think that the applied magnetic fields would be very effective and I'd love to know how you apply them. Mookie hints at an inductive supply. But I rather suspect that your neos will do very effectively what current flow does. Just not sure how you can vary that applied polarity to create what is it? difference in polarity? Or simply potential difference? You see this I hope? Those changing magnetic fields may be all that is needed to induce current flow. It would be interesting. Certainly to me.

**witsend** · 04-20-2010, 09:35 AM