All I know is, (don't come down on me for this, because I'm stating what I know and what I've seen), people have managed to separate water into its basic components WITHOUT using electrolyte, (Stan Meyer, whom I do not believe was a con artist, and others), and what you will notice is that for every instance of this, the person has not stuck by the rules of conventional electrolysis. Its just interesting. The systems they utilize usually have to do with high voltage (like, over 40,000v) and very low amperage draw. There's things about HHO we are still figuring out, and the best ways to research are doing it yourself. I'm convinced there are ways of designing effective electrolysers which do not require electrolyte. Call me crazy, but people HAVE DONE IT.
Keep an open mind, but not so much that your brain falls out
Jdawg, research exciting the gas molecules with various different light wavelengths, high voltage, resonance, effects under vacuum, applying magnetics to further reduce the strength of the water molecule, various electrical signals. (there are a million ways to apply a voltage to a cell in many different signal waveforms) These are the only ways that I can think of to use straight distilled water, not tap water with contaminants, to possibly make electrolysis more efficient.
Has anyone made this work and PROVEN it for a fact, NO!! But many have tried and you can too. Maybe you will get lucky and stumble upon the magic frequency to disassociate water with little to no power.
Yeah, it seems like a long shot. Technically, discovering how to do that would defy one of the laws of thermodynamics.
Although, Meyer's videos look extremely hard to fake.... Not to mention that despite the fact that you can get a patent for anything, even if it doesn't even work... (lol), The patent office would NOT give it to him until he actually brought in his "fuel cell" sytem and demonstrated to the group of observing scientists that it produced an insanely large ammount of HHO, with no electrolyte, and while it remained cool to the touch. The power draw was also in the range of miliamps.
I don't know about you, but I consider written unanimous consent from a throng of previously-skeptical scientists proof enough
Sources:
http://www.rexresearch.com/meyerhy/meyerhy.htm
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-P...y=PN%2F4936961
Keep an open mind... but not so open that your brain falls out
What I consider proof is an unbiased review and replication from someone with a respected reputation. I have yet to see the MANY MANY exaggerated claims over the years come true or be replicated even though I wanted them to work.
As far as patents go your device or invention DOES NOT have to work or be necessarily true to obtain a patent. This is because most inventors have the idea and a very crude prototype that they patent in order to safely obtain the funding to buy a real prototype that would prove their concepts.
I can totally see where your coming from, and I respect that. Hey can you answer my dumb question on the forums under thread, "Question about arcing current...?" I really need an answer and I'm sure its pretty obvious. Just if you have time or anything, you know. Thanks.
Keep an open mind... but not so open that your brain falls out
has anyone tried this ?
i have a power source bought a stun gun that should work 150k vdc anybody up to this?
Daniel
the only thing you cant do is the thing you dont want to do