Future Energy hydroxy cell

[Cloxxki]

Farrah,
Is the lpm such a big deal? Seems the sceptism is 2-fold:
1- No way that cell can produce that much gas
2- that lpm ain't cut it to run a run off

Obviously, the whole supposed point of FF's work as presented so far:
1- Claimed high pressure (you'll see 1lpm when it's really 4lpm)
2- Output gas is not standard HHO as we know it from basic electrolysis.

I'm am not even a novice compared to researchers like yourself, but 40 or 50lpm, at that pressure...why not? The cell seemed active enough, and there's the claimed ~4x compression going on.
Also, how are you going to measure 50lpm? Sure, fill a garbage bag with im easy enough. But I'd not want a couple buckets worth of HHO (let alone a claimed more punchy gas) to be in an enclosed container like that. It's just a lot of gas.

We can all come up with thousands of simple tests for FF to lend credibility to his work. If he could just fill a lab tube with his HHOi, for others to test the blast output of... Put it in a balloon and let us here the boom, compared to boring old HHO.

I'm quite a talker myself, but FF is making his viewers look silly to believe it all. Disclosure is a formality of mere minutes of uncu video, as we all concluded before. I was telling friends how I was sure this guy really did IT, but I'm not using this example anymore. I just cross my fingers and wish.

[adam_mizer]

FF Cell

HHO has many forms of burn rate or intensity.
I do not know much of this but I have seen 3 types of them and not much of the 3rd but it certainly had a big bang.
Thought this was interesting recieved in an email.

Yull Brown stated that he discovered 36 different properties of hydrogen
& oxygen.

Boyce says there are many different qualities of hydroxy gas. He coined
the phrase "hydroxy" gas
for anyone to use.

In order of combustional strength
1) Para hydrogen - normal
2) Ortho hydrogen - different spin state
3) Mono atomic hydrogen - When you reach resonance
4) Deutruim gas - ( Heavy water gas ) ionized gas ( Herman P Anderson Gas) maybe what Freddy is making ? ?
5) Tritruim gas - most powerful phases of hydrogen

At the quantity Freddy states I could see him making HHO 4 above.

Pretty soon we'll have more answers to our questions.

[Farrah Day]

Cloxxki

Also, how are you going to measure 50lpm

A simple flow meter is all that is required, and yes the 55lpm is such a big deal as this in itself would prove that FF was achieving something extraordinary, being many times over-Faraday. Pressure is irrelevant, but even at 55 amps he should not be getting anywhere near 55lpm.

And looks can be very deceptive. I've played with enough electrolysers to know that what seems like gallons of gas evolving from the electrodes, once sent through a bubbler, looks pretty pathetic by contrast. Though I'm still of the opinion FF is not making anything close to 55lpm from the depicted electrolyser, that is not to say there are not other elements at work.

Adam, I'm unsure about the last two in your 'order of combustible list', but the first three are in exactly the wrong order!

[Karl]

Anodic Reactions

Thoughts on why use the rust?

"Metal loss at anodic sites in an electrochemical cell occurs when the metal atoms give up one or more electrons and move into the electrolyte as positively charged ions."

Fundamental of Metal Corrosion, Corrosion theory & Corrosion Types

[Farrah Day]

Thoughts on why use the rust?

"Metal loss at anodic sites in an electrochemical cell occurs when the metal atoms give up one or more electrons and move into the electrolyte as positively charged ions."

Fundamental of Metal Corrosion, Corrosion theory & Corrosion Types

You obviously haven't been paying attention Karl. Freddy claims to be using this in the epoxy resin at the bottom of the cell. As such most - if not all - of the oxide will not be reacting with the water at all.

Let's just hope FF plans reveal everything we need to know.

As always with these claims, it makes real sense to, question everything, sort the wheat from the chaff and verify the facts. This way you are at the very least in a position to make an informed decision on how best to progress.

[adam_mizer]

Farrah,
I got the list in an email and thought it was alright.
Spin Isomers of hydrogen. Lets select for starters.
Para hydrogen, ortho hydrogen.
Para the protons of the 2 atoms are spinning away from each, the weakest of explosive force.
Ortho the protons are lined up on the same side strength of the gas is increased.
Now this is what I had thought but correct me if I'm wrong.

This is from Wiki, and yes could be wrong.
This is the T = 0 intercept seen in the molar energy of orthohydrogen. This residual energy, 1091 J/mol, is somewhat larger than the enthalpy of vaporization of normal hydrogen, 904 J/mol at the boiling point, Tb = 20.369 K (this refers to the "normal", room-temperature, 3:1 orthoara mixture).[1] Notably, the boiling points of parahydrogen and normal (3:1) hydrogen are nearly equal; for parahydrogen ∆Hvap = 898 J/mol at Tb = 20.277 K. It follows that nearly all the residual rotational energy of orthohydrogen is retained in the liquid state. Orthohydrogen is consequently unstable at low temperatures and spontaneously converts into parahydrogen, but the process is slow in the absence of a magnetic catalyst to facilitate interconversion of the singlet and triplet spin states. At room temperature, hydrogen contains 75% orthohydrogen, a proportion which the liquefaction process preserves if carried out in the absence of a catalyst like ferric oxide, activated carbon, platinized asbestos, rare earth metals, uranium compounds, chromic oxide, or some nickel compounds[4] to accelerate the conversion of the liquid hydrogen into parahydrogen, or supply additional refrigeration equipment to absorb the heat that the orthohydrogen fraction will release as it spontaneously converts into parahydrogen.

[Farrah Day]

In order of combustional strength
1) Para hydrogen - normal
2) Ortho hydrogen - different spin state
3) Mono atomic hydrogen - When you reach resonance
4) Deutruim gas - ( Heavy water gas ) ionized gas ( Herman P Anderson Gas) maybe what Freddy is making ? ?
5) Tritruim gas - most powerful phases of hydrogen

Adam, from that graph you attached it shows that ortho has more energy than para. And atomic gases always have more energy than molecular gases, so it seems to me that your list is likely completely backwards.

I, and I daresay anyone else reading your post would assume that the most combustible are at the top (no.1), working down to the least combustible. But you seem to have listed it in reverse.

Incidentally, I wouldn't read too much into anything you've heard about Herman Anderson creating deuterium. If you google deuterium you will get a good idea of why creating deuterium in a simple electrolyser is quite absurd.

[SeaMonkey]

...
I, and I daresay anyone else reading your post would assume that the most combustible are at the top (no.1), working down to the least combustible. But you seem to have listed it in reverse.

Incidentally, I wouldn't read too much into anything you've heard about Herman Anderson creating deuterium. If you google deuterium you will get a good idea of why creating deuterium in a simple electrolyser is quite absurd.

We're very fortunate to have you here doing
what you do best: encouraging people to THINK.

Many will be tempted to "replicate" what FF has
built without any understanding of what is "supposed"
to take place in the unit. Better that they should
wait until there has been total and complete
evaluation of each and every claim. Rushing into any
project without solid understanding will always result
in needless expense and effort. Only, in the end, to
be disappointed.

Thank You Farrah Day for "keeping this real."

[adam_mizer]

FF Cell

Yes the list is from weakest strength going to stronger.
Thats the way I got it and I have no problem with it, its just a point of view.

Yes it also keeps you thinking thank you for that Farrah.

Now if one were to make the 4th one on the list Deuterium at this point there seems to be a neutron involved.
Where does this come about.? I mean how can you add a neutron into the equation, it seems like now were talking fusion process? This one seems far fetched.

Also monatomic or is it also mono atomic hydrogen, is this protium (single proton and no neutrons and can take a negative charge.?

I can see the list of hydrogen grow when 1 more item is put into the mix.
At each stage there is much more strength locked into the atom(s).

Thinking a cell could do monatomic type hydrogen at best without going into a far stretched fusion process. But the make-up of the cell and the electronics should have the ability to alter the spin rates and charge of the hydrogen atom from our base of water and create a powerfull gas.

[Allcanadian]

@FarrahDay

The problem we all constantly face is pseudoscience - some of it intentional bull crap to make the claimant look more knowledgeable than he or she really is, but much of it unintentional and proffered simply by way of explanation. The thing is, if someone is making claims, then people tend to assume that the person making those claims must actually know what they are talking about. Of course the truth is that this is most often not the case. The implosion myth and rusting pistons being a case in point - and that's something that's been around for years and which some people still believe to be an issue!

I would agree we see a lot of pseudoscience, most recently black holes, worm holes, string theory, expanding universes, multiple universes, big bangs, virtual photons, god particles etc....,lol .You see none of this has ever been proven beyond all reasonable doubt as such they are nothing but unsubstantiated claims and theories not unlike what you are talking about. It is easy to judge without proven facts however proving the matter for yourself is never easy.
Regards
AC

[adam_mizer]

I did a simple experiment about 1.5yr's ago and although the product was very strong gas there was not much of it.
The experiment had some small qualities of what Freddy may be doing.

My experiment I concentrated on magnetic fields charging and discharging in a pair of chokes while electrolyzing gas in a sealed cell in a container.
Most interesting was that these Schumann based resonant frequency peaks at: 7.83, 14.3, 20.8, 27.3 and 33.8 Hz allowed me to see the potential magnetic field interaction between those chokes.
I was awed to watch chokes bouncing on my table when the magnetic field charged and discharged with chokes core inline to each other and pulsing at these low frequency's 7.83 and 14.3. Almost bouncing off the table!

At peaks of the above mentioned frequency's was the most interaction and I tuned until the field was at its strongest point.
Out came some gas from the tube housing!
In between the field strengths of those peaks yes there also was gas produced and it went from very small tiny bubbles to larger bubbles Strength of lit gas changed. In my tubes was a little cavity or space that could accumulate a couple bubbles.
At one high point of this low frequency pulsing field I got some bubbles that came out of the center negative tube and instead of rising straight up in the water bath they immediately deflected 90 degree's from the point of leaving the tube opening and in a very radical motion(totally radical like).
This was like jaw dropping to see, the only explaination at the time I could come up with was the gas became negatively charged to have this magnetized reaction.
To top this off that gas when on the surface once in a while gave me about a 1/4" bubble on the surface and I lit it as anybody would do testing gas strength. Well that sucker as small as it was displaced water out of the water bath container unlike gas bubbles created by standard electrolytic processes.

There was a ferrocious blast verses a standard blast, all I got is my eye's and ears here to tell me the differences.

From all my goofing around over the years I can tell the quality of the bang of HHO created and it seems I have seen and heard 3 or so various quality's or strengths.

The small test tube set was a copy of Meyer fig 3:25 and was a 3" outer 3/4" tube and a 4" x 1/2" inner drilled out rod. Water came in the bottom went through small drilled holes into the outer tube area and then went through small holes drilled back into the upper portion of the center tube. (center tube negative and outer tube positive). Both tubes weighed the same. Installed in a sealed heavy plastic housing and put into a water bath container, so the positive was as isolated as possible from the water bath.

Now Freddy is using near these frequency's and has acoustically tuned pipes and in one instance I have seen some coils wire leads in the epoxy under the tubes and he is making a decent amount of gas and is using some different materials. The gas could easily be a stronger variety of electrolyzed HHO.

My early test prooved to me there is a different variey of HHO gases beyond my doubts.

[SeaMonkey]

adam_mizer,

Do you recall what kind of circuit you were using
for your experiment to power the cell?

And what voltage and current?

[adam_mizer]

I got a board from ElectroJolt (Claudio). On my board I put 10 turn pots and the slowest capicitor was a 1uf, I guess this is called a gated pulse when each pulse wave is broken into many small pulses. My power source was usually set at 12v there was always a voltage drop at the cell (At the cell you could only measure about 3volts or so). The current on these tests I kept low can't actually remember the exact amount but I kept it between 250ma to 1.5a and I tried many chokes but think these were #20 at least 100 turns around 3/4" laminate steel cut off of a transformer core. And at that time I was also tried 100 turns of #16 on the same lamination bars I made.

[Farrah Day]

@FarrahDay

I would agree we see a lot of pseudoscience, most recently black holes, worm holes, string theory, expanding universes, multiple universes, big bangs, virtual photons, god particles etc....,lol .You see none of this has ever been proven beyond all reasonable doubt as such they are nothing but unsubstantiated claims and theories not unlike what you are talking about. It is easy to judge without proven facts however proving the matter for yourself is never easy.
Regards
AC

Hi AC. lol, I actually have a lot more faith in the things you mention above than some of the stuff we see on these forums coming from uneducated and uninformed members that are clearly making it up as they go along.

Adam, I had an argument with Bob Boyce quite recently regarding Herman Anderson, supposedly creating deuterium in his little electrolyser. I know I said it was 'absurd', but this term is probably not strong enough, 'utter madness' is probably more fitting. I know of no process by which deuterium is created by man. We are talking Big Bang beginning of the universe stuff here. Deuterium exists in normal water at very small quantities and indeed deuterium for nuclear power has to be painstakingly recovered from water... it is not created. Personally I will not entertain the idea of creating deuterium in a simple electrolyser.

Monatomic hydrogen is an oxymoron, it is enough to call it atomic hydrogen. And this is by far the most promising possibility when it comes to gaining extra energy. Atomic hydrogen is very energetic, but also most unstable, and it loses energy when it bonds with another hydrogen atom to become a molecule - it is an exothermic reaction.

When we ignite normal H2 in O2, energy is first lost in separating the molecules into atoms, ie an endothermic reaction. It is the resulting formation of the water molecule from the hydrogen and oxygen atoms that releases the great energy (exothermic). So it is logical to assume there will be an energy saving at one point in the process and hence effectively an energy gain at another point in the process, if we already have some atomic hydrogen and/or atomic oxygen in the mix before ignition.

Take a look at Dr.William Rhode's paper on this:

Common Duct Electrolytic Oxy-Hydrogen -- Paper by William A. Rhodes

I used to be in contact with him, but not even sure he's still alive now. Even a couple of years ago though, he still had all his wits about him and was a pleasure to converse with.

The interesting thing when it comes to why would not all the gases become molecular, may have something to do with Avogadro's hypothesis. This states, quote:

Under the same conditions of temperature and pressure, equal volumes of different gases contain the same number of molecules

This is interesting because it suggests that under like temp and pressure, a molecule of hydrogen takes up the same volume in space as, for example, an oxygen molecule, even though the oxygen molecule has far more mass.

If this is indeed the case, and this also applies to atoms (which actually take up more volume in space than their molecules), then, when confined (and/or pressurised as FF is doing) it may not be that easy for an atom of hydrogen to react with another.

If the hydrogen atoms were tiny in volume (as we tend to visualise them) compared to the oxygen atoms and molecules then it is easier to see how this small unit might be able to filter between the bigger atoms and molecules to reach another of its kind. But this would not be so easy if Avogadro's hypothesis is in effect and all the gas species are of similar sizes.

Think of it this way. If we had a container of 1/2" marbles and we added some sand, much of the sand would find its way quickly to the bottom of the container. Give the container a shake and much more will do so. However, if our container was all marbles, half red and half blue, we would never see the blue and red marbles separate or collect together - their physical size and the confines would simply not allow this. Do you see how important Avagadro's hypothesis may be in all this?

Incidentally Adam, with reference to your experiment, very interesting stuff.

[adam_mizer]

This is such a good place place to toss around ideas.
If a person could not toss around information and make and hear opinions and do experiments where would we be today, just about no-where!

Farrah I really like the marbles analogy.
If in the HHO case assume the same size proportionally between the oxygen and hydrogen then something must be happening which there are many avenues.
Possibly the hydrogens electron pushed out to a further n-band, does that take up volume? Or is their a magnetic field than can be considered volume of space?
I never looked at it the way Avogadro hypothesized, at this time I think it would do me no good for I'm not at a point of study that I could benefit from the information.

I'm more interested how the spin rates and flipping or aligning electrons in these gases effects the potential strength. The pulsing low-frequency at or near the Schumann resonances helps create the altered gases from water (amazing if its so).
But I can't see how this low frequency causes a acoustically tuned S/S pipe or tube to resonate or come to resonance. How can 14.7hz signal make a tube tuned near 1760hz and a tube near 2217hz resonate with a 2mm gap between them? Not counting the outer tubes yet as I have not figured their frequency and they may be more important because there are 9 of them verses this single center pair.
Are there any others that have attempted this tuning?

I'm baffled and would like to hear or read the amazing explaination about this!