Meyer's Process - As Simple as It Gets
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Tomorrow they are ready to start the LHC collider. The Earthcan be exploded in a 1000 seconds!
Next: Two times happening together
From: knews4u2chew on 24 Feb 2010 16:08 Dielectric Breakdown of H2O Creating HHO Constituent Gasses It doesn't get any more simple. Isolate the capacitor. Distilled water helps but is not necessary with added technology. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-WO-sorNkA&NR=1 http://www.youtube.com/user/OMA1981#p/u/0/Q-WO-sorNkA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xO75oL_6hrk&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4foe0EH3YM&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G33JphIKY2Y&feature=related THIS IS NOT ELECTROLYSIS. Without Prejudice, U.C.C. 1-207-9
From: Don Lancaster on 25 Feb 2010 10:37 knews4u2chew(a)yahoo.com wrote: > Dielectric Breakdown of H2O Creating HHO Constituent Gasses > > It doesn't get any more simple. Correct. Specifically... What most likely happened were the usual incompetent pulse measurement errors that everybody else always makes. Not one individual anyplace ever has been able to duplicate the Meyer claims on an independently verifiable basis. An Ohio judge found "gross and egregrious fraud" and a "loose grip on reality" The actual trial transcriptions have never been made available due to high admin costs. The experiment DOES get rerun many tens of thousands of times daily by EIS researchers. With uniformly negative results. A fundamental thermodynamic principle involving exergy flat out GUARANTEES that bulk energy hydrogen electrolysis from high value sources (such as grid, pv, wind, or alternator) ain't gonna happen. The whole venture is thus totally useless. Convincing British "experts" simply did not happen. Based on a "lame excuse" at test time. Newsgroup response by proponents is uniformly vitrolic and crudely ad-hominum. Credible and factual info is rarely posted. Many proponents are clearly not housebroken. No unusual or overunity claims appear in any of the patents. The patents simply describe an enormously inefficient and impractical approach to electrolysis.. For Meyer to be right, countless others would have to be dead wrong. Including Faraday's Law, Fourier Series, the fundamental definition of current, EDM machining, Qprox proximity sensors, thermodynamic fundamentals, and many more diverse examples. Claims of "nuclear and not chemical" are prima facie absurd because of the outrageous energy level differences. The root cause appeared to be not knowing the difference between "volts" (a potential) and "electron volts" (an energy measurement). The molecular resonance frequency of water is THOUSANDS of times higher than the frequencies in use. No overunity resonance effect has ever been demonstrated anytime ever. The Meyer circuits completely ignore the inescapable fact that water-to-hydrogen conversion involves moving electrons and thus is inherently CURRENT driven rather than voltage. Current sources are inherently inefficient unless special switchmode techniques are in use. Not one credible peer reviewed paper has ever been published anywhere on what certainly would have been a world class fundamental upheaval in the laws of thermodynamics. "Publish or Perish" should have produced a glut of scholarly research. "Oil company suppression" seems conspicuously absent since all the fully detailed material is freely available on the web from multiple sources. Albeit highly incompetent and sorely misguided ones. Failing to use platinized platinum electrodes and the stainless steel overvoltage of iron guarantees low efficiency. Only the DC term of a Fourier equivalent pulse waveform will normally contribute significantly to gas production. A double integration is clearly involved. http://www.tinaja.com/glib/bashpseu.pdf http://www.tinaja.com/glib/nrglect2.pdf -- Many thanks, Don Lancaster voice phone: (928)428-4073 Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552 rss: http://www.tinaja.com/whtnu.xml email: don(a)tinaja.com Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com
From: Rob Dekker on 26 Feb 2010 02:09 <knews4u2chew(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:d04608ba-1bb8-469e-8d1b-b569fc695217(a)b36g2000pri.googlegroups.com... On Feb 25, 7:37 am, Don Lancaster <d...(a)tinaja.com> wrote: > > knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com wrote: > > > Dielectric Breakdown of H2O Creating HHO Constituent Gasses > > > > > It doesn't get any more simple. > > > > Correct. > > Specifically... > > > > What most likely happened were the usual > > incompetent pulse measurement errors that > > everybody else always makes. > > Prove it Donny Dude, Donny does not need to prove anything. He is merely pointing out that it has been shown many times (including in a court of law) that Meyer is a fraud and a lier. The claimer of succes for this idiotic experiment, knews4u2chew, who posted the message (oh. that's you, isn't it?) is the one who needs to substantiate his claims with evidence. Please let us know if you find anything, OK ? Thanks, and good luck to you Rob
From: knews4u2chew on 26 Feb 2010 12:09 On Feb 25, 11:09 pm, "Rob Dekker" <r...(a)verific.com> wrote: > <knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message > > news:d04608ba-1bb8-469e-8d1b-b569fc695217(a)b36g2000pri.googlegroups.com... > On Feb 25, 7:37 am, Don Lancaster <d...(a)tinaja.com> wrote: > > > > knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com wrote: > > > > Dielectric Breakdown of H2O Creating HHO Constituent Gasses > > > > > It doesn't get any more simple. > > > > Correct. > > > Specifically... > > > > What most likely happened were the usual > > > incompetent pulse measurement errors that > > > everybody else always makes. > > > Prove it Donny > > Dude, Donny does not need to prove anything. He claims that experimenters have meters that are being fooled. He MUST PROVE THAT THE WAVE FORM IN THE RC CIRCUIT FOOLS METERS. > He is merely pointing out that > it has been shown many times (including in a court of law) that Meyer is a > fraud and a lier. > Red herring. The court ignored Meyer's expert witness testimony. The court allowed evidence tampering. The court merely didn't like that he was taking years to sell a product. They fined him $1 for this "egregious fraud." They NEVER told him to stop his activities or funding scheme. > The claimer of succes for this idiotic experiment, knews4u2chew, who posted > the message (oh. that's you, isn't it?) is the one who needs to substantiate > his claims with evidence. > > Please let us know if you find anything, OK ? > No one here will believe anyone who posts numbers. Ravi's numbers are here: http://h2o0il.com > Thanks, and good luck to you > > Rob Ever heard of independent verification? Repeatability?
From: PV on 26 Feb 2010 13:57
knews4u2chew(a)yahoo.com writes: >He claims that experimenters have meters that are being fooled. >He MUST PROVE THAT THE WAVE FORM IN THE RC CIRCUIT FOOLS METERS. So I take it you don't know what "rms" means in this context? * -- * PV Something like badgers, something like lizards, and something like corkscrews. |