Future Energy hydroxy cell

[penno64]

This Freddy is a GENIUS !!!

Regards, Penno

[adam_mizer]

Freddy's cell

Yes its a tuned resonant tube-set.

Can't fully remember but do believe this tube-set is 1/2 wave tuned and the 2pipes (tubes) are tuned to each other acoustically.
Freddy already did all the math for "us" the tuning and pipe sizes as I posted in an earlier post. Freddy's math matched as best as possible the 1/2wave and the acoustic tuned frequencys when in water. This vary's slightly as there is now gas and water, acoustic frequency and electric DC current and low voltage pulse wave.
The acoustic resonant tuning was based on a fundamental of the primary frequency of the tubes vibrational ringing. Truelly a mathematic cranium would have to figure this out. (More involved than I can put into my head).

The PWM as I understand is set at 14.7hz and the circuit of the MX068 was slightly modified to enable this slow pulse change.

I learned something simple that I never even thought about what it would do.

The fact that the 1 pipe is taller than the other and not flush together at the tops creates an ionization, basically a low form of plasma gas is made, (I say low because it can and will go beyond what we see), apparently it also charges the water to the extreme that it becomes self powering and keeps releasing gases from the water as it created the cascading effect. Plates and pulsed DC current were doing general electrolysis to start, but when water is charged to the threshold Freddy pointed out has enough force to maintain a resonant condition in this cell and use the energy from the water that seems to be multiplying as its force almost appears stronger when the current pulse is basically turned off. "Amazing!"
Now you have tuned tubes 1/2wave RF and acousto-mechanical, apparently there is more power locked in these atoms than we may not know about. This system taps into that energy, as it is very hard to explain its real workings because it hasn't been done to often and is not a particular energy form that is taught through-out the world but has been done in our government controlled science programs.

We have some strong brains here at Energetic Forum that could do a much better job at these explainations we seek.
It is real easy to state this has been supressed for many many years.

Here is a email I copied from another member at a yahoo forum, hope, and don't think he would mind me reposting this:

Possible Theories

- Negative Resistor, transforming the local vacuum energy into charged particles. Tom Bearden, John Bedini, and many other scientists have written about this type of energy for decades.

- Fusion, Freddy and Adam's initial theory. Fusion also typically generates lots of heat (millions of degrees), in addition to neutron, helium and other produces of fusing atoms. A simple detector can confirm if fusion products are being emitted.

- Cold Fusion, but instead of OU Heat, creating OU Gas production. Lots of CF theories but mostly on explaining where the "excess heat" energy comes from. I do not know of any CF researcher that claimed excess hydrogen gas production instead of excess heat.

- Lots of other theories from ZPE (Moray King) to Orgone Energy (Reich), to Ether Energy (Tesla).

Take your pick on which theory you subscribe to. More research and experimenting will narrow it down eventually. We are just at the start of this energy discovery. As more people do the experiments, more data can be analyzed to determine the best theory of operation.



We just need to wrap our heads around this and get going, slowly the replications and tests will start to show up.

I'm not a salesman but a PDF will be released soon and I suggest get this PDF when it becomes available as the whole build will be in there.

[Cloxxki]

If someone would put this a bit more in layman's terms, please? I seem to see electrolysis in a single (tuned?) tube, but what's now making the electricity to drive the PWM circuit? Where's the feedback? I think I only know the kind where the produced gasses are combusted in an engine of some kind, with an alternator attached. Is there a short cut now? That would mean the end of expensive H producing stations, right? The H fuel cell car becomes 1000* more viable at once. I just don't get it yet.
Thanks,

[adam_mizer]

Freddys cell

Here's a nice video Freddy made the other day, worth watching.

It appears Adam and Jim came by with a single tube set Adam is working on.
An acoustically resonant tube-set (1 pair), the MX068 PWM modified for 14.7hz, DMM connected in series to battery post reading amperage, a 4 gallon bucket of water and 2 teaspoons of KOH.

Watch it as it produces its own power after the threashold was reached then backed off PWM current!
Threshold 3 amp then back off to .025 (25milli-amp power running PWM board).

Truelly Amazing. (My jaw dropped as here is something that appears as a gift).

Last week I just had to visit Fred and his wife. Real people with heart's of gold. God bless!
I enjoyed my visit, talked, checked out the shop, helped out a little - yada yada.

YouTube - FutureEnergyConcepts's Channel

[Cloxxki]

An update on the HHOi and Rick's cell from HydrogenSolutionsCenter.

http://pesn.com/2010/09/27/9501707_H...water_and_air/

Sterling makes a jump on the Rick cell technology and its almost like the Freddy Cell in some instances.
Good reading and more information.

It seems there may be a link to pressurizing the cell to 60PSI.
Also noted are some easy tests on the HHOi type, balloon tests to see if the balloon will float or drop.
Pay attention to the warning of sharp edges where static charges can build up.

Care must be taken, but it seems a door is opening a little wider.

A correction is already posted...

[adam_mizer]

An update on the HHOi and Rick's cell from HydrogenSolutionsCenter.

http://pesn.com/2010/09/27/9501707_H...water_and_air/

Sterling makes a jump on the Rick cell technology and its almost like the Freddy Cell in some instances.
Good reading and more information.

It seems there may be a link to pressurizing the cell to 60PSI.
Also noted are some easy tests on the HHOi type, balloon tests to see if the balloon will float or drop.
Pay attention to the warning of sharp edges where static charges can build up.

Care must be taken, but it seems a door is opening a little wider.

[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!

[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]

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.

[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 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.

[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]

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.

[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."

[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.