News item : Stanley Meyer

2579 views
Skip to first unread message

Harold Wicks

unread,
Dec 3, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/3/96
to

Sunday Times Innovation 1 Dec. 96 (http://www.sunday-times.co.uk)

End of road for car that ran on Water

American court finds inventor of water-powered car is guilty of fraud.
Report by Tony Edwards

It appears to be the end of the road for maverick inventor Stanley Meyer and
his water-powered car after a recent American court verdict.

The car was a wonderful, if unlikely, dream while it lasted, offering a
pollution-free future powered by a limitless source of energy. But the
dream was shattered when Meyer was found guilty of fraud after his Water
Fuel Cell was tested before an Ohio judge.
It is rare for an inventor to be prosecuted for an invention that does not
work, but Meyer's problem was that he had been selling "dealerships",
offering investors the "right to do business'' in Water Fuel Cell tech-
nology in anticipation of the day when water would power anything From
domestic boilers to cars and aircraft.
But recently two suspicious investors could not wait for that day to dawn
and sued Meyer to get their money back.
Meyer defended, maintaining his long-held claim that the Water Fuel Cell was a truly
revolutionary invention that could split water into its two constituent
gases of hydrogen and oxygen far more efficiently than conventional
electrolysis. The secret, he said, was to "resonate" electricity at a very
high voltage through water and so "fracture" the hydrogen/oxygen molecular
bond. This, he claimed, opened the way for a car which would "run on wat-
er", powered simply by a car battery. The car would even run for ever since
the energy needed to continue the "fracturing" was so low that the bat-
tery could be recharged: from the engine's dynamo.

Meyer claimed to have adapted a 1.6-litre Volkswagen Dune Buggy to run on
water. He replaced the sparkplugs with "injectors" which, he said, sprayed
water as a fine mist in a "resonant cavity" where it was bombarded by a
succession of high-voltage electrical pulses. He claimed this instantly
converted the water into a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen that could be
combusted in the cylinders, driving the pistons just as in an ordinary
petrol engine.
One of the experts due toexamine the car was Michael Laughton, professor
of electrical engineering at Queen Mary and Westfield University, London,
but he was not allowed to see it. "Although Meyer had known about our
visit weeks in advance, when we arrived he made some lame excuse about why
the car wasn't working, so it was impossible to evaluate it," said
Laughton.
However, the one thing Meyer had built that appeared to work was his Water
Fuel Cell, and it was this device that the Ohio judge called as evidence in
the recent lawsuit.
The cell had been the centrepiece of Meyer's sales pitches. It was a
transparent cylinder of water inside which was a core of stainless steel
electrodes. When plugged into an electrical supply,the cell bubbled away
merrily, producing apparently copious amounts of gas that Meyer ignited
through a welding torch.To the layman it was an impressive performance and
hundreds of small investors signed up, but it did not impress three expert
witnesses in court.
They decided that there was nothing revolutionary about the cell at all and
that it was simply using conventional electrolysis.
Meyer was found guilty of "gross and egregious fraud" and ordered to repay
the investors their $25,000 (£15,000).

( Any views ? )

--
..Every breadth we draw, every step we take, every thought we think,
every sound or word we utter and the aeons of grief and oceans of tears
we've shed for our needs or the secret exquisite pleasures, ease and
security we seek
we owe them all to our father cosmos & sun and earth mother !
Who else ?. Isn’t this all we are and every thing that is and will ever be ?
Animated tail chasing star dust !; matter spirit energy yin yang dance !
(Probably the gist of a partly remembered translation of a Vedic hymn )


Harold Wicks

unread,
Dec 3, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/3/96
to

Robin van Spaandonk

unread,
Dec 4, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/4/96
to

In article <10...@hertsh.win-uk.net>, Harold Wicks wrote :
[snip]

>through a welding torch.To the layman it was an impressive performance and
>hundreds of small investors signed up, but it did not impress three expert
>witnesses in court.
>They decided that there was nothing revolutionary about the cell at all and
>that it was simply using conventional electrolysis.
>Meyer was found guilty of "gross and egregious fraud" and ordered to repay
>the investors their $25,000 (Ł15,000).

>
>( Any views ? )
Just a question. Was any reference made to the measurements taken by the
expert witnesses? I.e. did they make any measurements, and if so are the
results available?
[snip]
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk <rvan...@netspace.net.au>
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
Check out: http://netspace.net.au/~rvanspaa for how CF depends on
temperature.
"....,then he should stop, and he will catch up..."
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

Harold Wicks

unread,
Dec 5, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/5/96
to

In article <32aa15c8...@news.netspace.net.au>, Robin van Spaandonk (rvan...@netspace.net.au) writes:

>In article <10...@hertsh.win-uk.net>, Harold Wicks wrote :
>[snip]
>>through a welding torch.To the layman it was an impressive performance and
>>hundreds of small investors signed up, but it did not impress three expert

===snip=====

>Just a question. Was any reference made to the measurements taken by the
>expert witnesses? I.e. did they make any measurements, and if so are the
>results available?

Nothing was quoted in the news item.

For the sake of 'justice being seen to be done' the evidence from the expert
witnesses in the form of a report based on laboratory investigations is to be
expected.
This report together with other depositions related to the case is a matter
of public record and is likely to be available from the court.

Perhaps it may even be available on line ?.

Does anyone know about access to court records in Ohio ?.

One of the expert witnesses was reported to be Michael Laughton, professor

of electrical engineering at Queen Mary and Westfield University, London,

He may respond to a an email request.

You may find some information at http://www.qmw.ac.uk Queen Mary & Westfield
College Univ. of London +44 0171-975-5029

Regards,

Harold Wicks.

--


Harry H Conover

unread,
Dec 6, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/6/96
to

Harold Wicks (hwi...@hertsh.win-uk.net) wrote:
:
: It appears to be the end of the road for maverick inventor Stanley Meyer and

: his water-powered car after a recent American court verdict.

Thank God! Unfortunately, another confidence man will likely replace
him within the fortnight, equally willing to take investments from the
naive and ignorant, baited with promises of something for nothing.

:
: The car was a wonderful, if unlikely, dream while it lasted, offering a

: pollution-free future powered by a limitless source of energy. But the

: dream was shattered when Meyer was found guilty of fraud after his Water

: Fuel Cell was tested before an Ohio judge.

Alas, Meyer was but another 'rainmaker.'

: It is rare for an inventor to be prosecuted for an invention that does not

: work, but Meyer's problem was that he had been selling "dealerships",
: offering investors the "right to do business'' in Water Fuel Cell tech-
: nology in anticipation of the day when water would power anything From
: domestic boilers to cars and aircraft.

Sorry, I don't want to rain on your parade, but Meyer was less 'inventor'
and more con-man.

: But recently two suspicious investors could not wait for that day to dawn

: and sued Meyer to get their money back.

Surprise! Justice prevails, at least sometimes.

: Meyer defended, maintaining his long-held claim that the Water Fuel Cell was a truly


: revolutionary invention that could split water into its two constituent
: gases of hydrogen and oxygen far more efficiently than conventional
: electrolysis.

I give him credit for this. At least he didn't flee town!

: The secret, he said, was to "resonate" electricity at a very


: high voltage through water and so "fracture" the hydrogen/oxygen molecular
: bond. This, he claimed, opened the way for a car which would "run on wat-
: er", powered simply by a car battery. The car would even run for ever since
: the energy needed to continue the "fracturing" was so low that the bat-
: tery could be recharged: from the engine's dynamo.

Sad. With an education, he could have made something of himself.
I give him credit -- He has imagination!

:
: Meyer claimed to have adapted a 1.6-litre Volkswagen Dune Buggy to run on

: water. He replaced the sparkplugs with "injectors" which, he said, sprayed
: water as a fine mist in a "resonant cavity" where it was bombarded by a
: succession of high-voltage electrical pulses. He claimed this instantly
: converted the water into a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen that could be
: combusted in the cylinders, driving the pistons just as in an ordinary
: petrol engine.

To the layman, likely an impressive tale. Unfortunately, to an educated
person, Meyer's claims are little more than pseudo-scientific nonsense.

: One of the experts due toexamine the car was Michael Laughton, professor

: of electrical engineering at Queen Mary and Westfield University, London,

: but he was not allowed to see it. "Although Meyer had known about our

: visit weeks in advance, when we arrived he made some lame excuse about why
: the car wasn't working, so it was impossible to evaluate it," said
: Laughton.

Yawn.

: However, the one thing Meyer had built that appeared to work was his Water

: Fuel Cell, and it was this device that the Ohio judge called as evidence in
: the recent lawsuit.
: The cell had been the centrepiece of Meyer's sales pitches. It was a
: transparent cylinder of water inside which was a core of stainless steel
: electrodes. When plugged into an electrical supply,the cell bubbled away
: merrily, producing apparently copious amounts of gas that Meyer ignited

: through a welding torch.To the layman it was an impressive performance and


: hundreds of small investors signed up, but it did not impress three expert

: witnesses in court.

Somewhat theatrical perhaps, but that's what impresses laymen. I recall
witnessing, as a child, New Jersey State Fair demonstrations of ignition
coils that would quadruple your gas mileage, devices that would enable
your car to partially employ water as a fuel, and a car battery that could
last forever...in a nearby booth one company sold their stock claiming
they would produce a nuclear fueled furnace for the home.

As most of us grow older, we also become a bit wiser.

: They decided that there was nothing revolutionary about the cell at all and

: that it was simply using conventional electrolysis.
: Meyer was found guilty of "gross and egregious fraud" and ordered to repay

: the investors their $25,000 (£15,000).

What, no triple damages? If I were an investor, I'd appeal this
decision... Of course that would require that I acknowledge that I
had invested in this ridiculous scheme in the first place!

: ..Every breadth we draw, every step we take, every thought we think,

: every sound or word we utter and the aeons of grief and oceans of tears
: we've shed for our needs or the secret exquisite pleasures, ease and
: security we seek
: we owe them all to our father cosmos & sun and earth mother !

...And to the nuclear forces/energies that propel the cosmos in
this eternal, seductive and erotic dance....

Harry C.


: Who else ?. Isn’t this all we are and every thing that is and will ever be ?

:

Jim Toth

unread,
Dec 9, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/9/96
to


Harold Wicks <hwi...@hertsh.win-uk.net> wrote in article
<10...@hertsh.win-uk.net>...


>
>
> Sunday Times Innovation 1 Dec. 96 (http://www.sunday-times.co.uk)
>
> End of road for car that ran on Water
>
> American court finds inventor of water-powered car is guilty of fraud.
> Report by Tony Edwards
>

> It appears to be the end of the road for maverick inventor Stanley Meyer
and
> his water-powered car after a recent American court verdict.
>

<snip>


> ( Any views ? )
>

> --
>
Thirty years from now they'll make a movie about it and how major
Automakers conspired to hide this technology.


John Conran

unread,
Dec 9, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/9/96
to


Harry H Conover <con...@tiac.net> wrote in article
<588fcm$3...@news-central.tiac.net>...


> Harold Wicks (hwi...@hertsh.win-uk.net) wrote:
> :
> : It appears to be the end of the road for maverick inventor Stanley
Meyer and
> : his water-powered car after a recent American court verdict.
>
> Thank God! Unfortunately, another confidence man will likely replace

> ...(snip)...


> Somewhat theatrical perhaps, but that's what impresses laymen. I recall
> witnessing, as a child, New Jersey State Fair demonstrations of ignition

> coils that would quadruple your gas mileage, ...(snip)...

> they would produce a nuclear fueled furnace for the home.

> (snip)...

I have heard that the ignition coil idea does work by firing the spark plug
multiple times in quick succession with a simple resonant circuit. There is
nothing magical about this, only more complete combustion of the fuel-air
mixture.

That furnace was run on CF was it?

John Conran
<conran...@bhp.com.au>
My opinions are my own, which is logical Captain and bloody obvious.

re...@atomicsys.com

unread,
Dec 12, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/12/96
to

Gee thats too bad, cause a fellow has been running a '79 Caddilac 500 cu-in
car since 1983 on " WATER " broken down to hydrogen. he just lets the O2 go,
and uses the Hydrogen. works just fine.

BOB.


Richard W

unread,
Dec 13, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/13/96
to

> Sunday Times Innovation 1 Dec. 96 (http://www.sunday-times.co.uk)
> End of road for car that ran on Water
>
> American court finds inventor of water-powered car is guilty of fraud.
> Report by Tony Edwards

> ( Any views ? )

Very Interesting. At the moment I'm doing an A level physics project on
many of these devices ie Griggs Pump, Browns Gas. Neon Transformer etc etc,
and am having to deal with lack of evidence that is needed for me to prove
that some of these Over Unity devices may exist.

Does anyone know what a Spherical Resonator is? It's in refrence to Stanley
Meyers device, but I would like a better description than " it's round and
resonates" please.

Thankyou.

Richard
--
wheat...@moose.co.uk
The ^Nexus Home Page
http://www.moose.co.uk/userfiles/wheatcroft/
North Watford Venture Scout Unit
http://www.moose.co.uk/userfiles/wheatcroft/nwvsu/
North Watford Young Scout Fellowship
http://www.moose.co.uk/userfiles/wheatcroft/nwysf/


Steve Marschman

unread,
Dec 15, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/15/96
to

In article <rebry.424...@atomicsys.com>, re...@atomicsys.com says...

>
>Gee thats too bad, cause a fellow has been running a '79 Caddilac 500 cu-in
>car since 1983

Must be a special Cadillac... the 500 was dropped after the 1976 model year.
Only lowly 325s were offered (though using the same block design as the 500).

Steve


Tony Leathem

unread,
Dec 16, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/16/96
to

re...@atomicsys.com wrote:
>
> Gee thats too bad, cause a fellow has been running a '79 Caddilac 500 cu-in
> car since 1983 on " WATER " broken down to hydrogen. he just lets the O2 go,
> and uses the Hydrogen. works just fine.
>
> BOB.
Hi Bob, would this fella be named Carl Cella by any chance, as I have
read an article in a magazine about a hydrogen generator he has built
and would like some more info about him and the generator, any help
would be greatly appreciated..
Cheers and a Merry Christmas to one and all
Tony..

--
Tony Leathem
T & K Electronic Repairs
E-Mail: t.le...@cww.octec.org.au

karthi...@gmail.com

unread,
Aug 9, 2013, 4:53:08 PM8/9/13
to
On Tuesday, December 3, 1996 12:00:00 AM UTC-8, Harold Wicks wrote:
> Sunday Times Innovation 1 Dec. 96 (http://www.sunday-times.co.uk)
>
> End of road for car that ran on Water
>
> American court finds inventor of water-powered car is guilty of fraud.
> Report by Tony Edwards
>
> It appears to be the end of the road for maverick inventor Stanley Meyer and
> his water-powered car after a recent American court verdict.
>
> The car was a wonderful, if unlikely, dream while it lasted, offering a
> pollution-free future powered by a limitless source of energy. But the
> dream was shattered when Meyer was found guilty of fraud after his Water
> Fuel Cell was tested before an Ohio judge.
> It is rare for an inventor to be prosecuted for an invention that does not
> work, but Meyer's problem was that he had been selling "dealerships",
> offering investors the "right to do business'' in Water Fuel Cell tech-
> nology in anticipation of the day when water would power anything From
> domestic boilers to cars and aircraft.
> But recently two suspicious investors could not wait for that day to dawn
> and sued Meyer to get their money back.
> Meyer defended, maintaining his long-held claim that the Water Fuel Cell was a truly
> revolutionary invention that could split water into its two constituent
> gases of hydrogen and oxygen far more efficiently than conventional
> electrolysis. The secret, he said, was to "resonate" electricity at a very
> high voltage through water and so "fracture" the hydrogen/oxygen molecular
> bond. This, he claimed, opened the way for a car which would "run on wat-
> er", powered simply by a car battery. The car would even run for ever since
> the energy needed to continue the "fracturing" was so low that the bat-
> tery could be recharged: from the engine's dynamo.
>
> Meyer claimed to have adapted a 1.6-litre Volkswagen Dune Buggy to run on
> water. He replaced the sparkplugs with "injectors" which, he said, sprayed
> water as a fine mist in a "resonant cavity" where it was bombarded by a
> succession of high-voltage electrical pulses. He claimed this instantly
> converted the water into a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen that could be
> combusted in the cylinders, driving the pistons just as in an ordinary
> petrol engine.
> One of the experts due toexamine the car was Michael Laughton, professor
> of electrical engineering at Queen Mary and Westfield University, London,
> but he was not allowed to see it. "Although Meyer had known about our
> visit weeks in advance, when we arrived he made some lame excuse about why
> the car wasn't working, so it was impossible to evaluate it," said
> Laughton.
> However, the one thing Meyer had built that appeared to work was his Water
> Fuel Cell, and it was this device that the Ohio judge called as evidence in
> the recent lawsuit.
> The cell had been the centrepiece of Meyer's sales pitches. It was a
> transparent cylinder of water inside which was a core of stainless steel
> electrodes. When plugged into an electrical supply,the cell bubbled away
> merrily, producing apparently copious amounts of gas that Meyer ignited
> through a welding torch.To the layman it was an impressive performance and
> hundreds of small investors signed up, but it did not impress three expert
> witnesses in court.
> They decided that there was nothing revolutionary about the cell at all and
> that it was simply using conventional electrolysis.
> Meyer was found guilty of "gross and egregious fraud" and ordered to repay
> the investors their $25,000 (£15,000).
>
> ( Any views ? )
>
> --
> ..Every breadth we draw, every step we take, every thought we think,
> every sound or word we utter and the aeons of grief and oceans of tears
> we've shed for our needs or the secret exquisite pleasures, ease and
> security we seek
> we owe them all to our father cosmos & sun and earth mother !

knews4...@yahoo.com

unread,
Nov 20, 2013, 11:03:45 PM11/20/13
to
"Spherical Resonant Cavity"
https://www.google.com/search?client=opera&q=meyer+spherical+resonant+cavity&sourceid=opera&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8


On Friday, December 13, 1996 12:00:00 AM UTC-8, Richard W wrote:
> > Sunday Times Innovation 1 Dec. 96 (http://www.sunday-times.co.uk)
> > End of road for car that ran on Water
> >
> > American court finds inventor of water-powered car is guilty of fraud.
> > Report by Tony Edwards
>
> > ( Any views ? )
>

knews4...@yahoo.com

unread,
Nov 20, 2013, 11:07:59 PM11/20/13
to
Meyer's version of the courthouse events is posted here:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/sci.energy.hydrogen/public$20notice$20to$20inform$20stan$20meyer/sci.energy.hydrogen/wKc9HgxHEhs/RWjFye39VUgJ

On Wednesday, December 4, 1996 12:00:00 AM UTC-8, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
> In article <10...@hertsh.win-uk.net>, Harold Wicks wrote :
> [snip]
> >through a welding torch.To the layman it was an impressive performance and
> >hundreds of small investors signed up, but it did not impress three expert
> >witnesses in court.
> >They decided that there was nothing revolutionary about the cell at all and
> >that it was simply using conventional electrolysis.
> >Meyer was found guilty of "gross and egregious fraud" and ordered to repay
> >the investors their $25,000 (£15,000).
> >
> >( Any views ? )
> Just a question. Was any reference made to the measurements taken by the
> expert witnesses? I.e. did they make any measurements, and if so are the
> results available?

knews4...@yahoo.com

unread,
Nov 20, 2013, 11:09:35 PM11/20/13
to

I'm pretty sure old CONover is dead or senile...he was a classic liar here for years...

knews4...@yahoo.com

unread,
Nov 22, 2013, 4:27:14 PM11/22/13
to
I began posting here as:
H2O...@aol.com
around 1997.
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/sci.energy.hydrogen/h2o...@aol.com
I have been trying to find my very first original post for a few years once in a while.
My H2O...@aol.com "Profile" starts before at a date before the posts and threads that appear by my search.
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!searchin/sci.energy.hydrogen/h2o...@aol.com

and then as A FEW other nyms...

https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!searchin/sci.energy.hydrogen/knews4...@yahoo.com

There are many Meyer sites and research blogs....
I have posted in the past on these research sites:
www.ionazationx.org
http://www.ionizationx.com/index.php?action=profile;area=showposts;u=2260
And as MeyerandMe here:
http://open-source-energy.org/forum/showthread.php?tid=733

I was summarily "Flamed" for years HERE as was Michael OHANNON, Tad Johnson, until the appearance of these sites because sci.energy.hydrogen "News Group" was a cesspool of "authority," as to MY PERSONAL FRIEND, Stanley A. Meyer which I first met in 1985 by phone.
Before I even arrived as PERSONAL EYE WITNESS, with others, to the operation of Meyer's Water Fuel Cell(R)....THREE SEPERATE TIMES in TWO DIFFERENT LOCATIONS... this "group of educational 'scientist" etc.," DECIDED WITHOUT A SHRED OF EVIDENCE THAT "Meyer is a fraud."

And so it goes.....he is dead....

Vaya con Dios,
R.I.P Stanley A. Meyer

JW
JP

On Tuesday, December 3, 1996 12:00:00 AM UTC-8, Harold Wicks wrote:
> Sunday Times Innovation 1 Dec. 96 (http://www.sunday-times.co.uk)
>
> End of road for car that ran on Water
>
> American court finds inventor of water-powered car is guilty of fraud.
> Report by Tony Edwards
>
> It appears to be the end of the road for maverick inventor Stanley Meyer and
> his water-powered car after a recent American court verdict.
>
> The car was a wonderful, if unlikely, dream while it lasted, offering a
> pollution-free future powered by a limitless source of energy. But the
> dream was shattered when Meyer was found guilty of fraud after his Water
> Fuel Cell was tested before an Ohio judge.
> It is rare for an inventor to be prosecuted for an invention that does not
> work, but Meyer's problem was that he had been selling "dealerships",
> offering investors the "right to do business'' in Water Fuel Cell tech-
> nology in anticipation of the day when water would power anything From
> domestic boilers to cars and aircraft.
> But recently two suspicious investors could not wait for that day to dawn
> and sued Meyer to get their money back.
> Meyer defended, maintaining his long-held claim that the Water Fuel Cell was a truly
> revolutionary invention that could split water into its two constituent
> gases of hydrogen and oxygen far more efficiently than conventional
> electrolysis. The secret, he said, was to "resonate" electricity at a very
> high voltage through water and so "fracture" the hydrogen/oxygen molecular
> bond. This, he claimed, opened the way for a car which would "run on wat-
> er", powered simply by a car battery. The car would even run for ever since
> the energy needed to continue the "fracturing" was so low that the bat-
> tery could be recharged: from the engine's dynamo.
>
> Meyer claimed to have adapted a 1.6-litre Volkswagen Dune Buggy to run on
> water. He replaced the sparkplugs with "injectors" which, he said, sprayed
> water as a fine mist in a "resonant cavity" where it was bombarded by a
> succession of high-voltage electrical pulses. He claimed this instantly
> converted the water into a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen that could be
> combusted in the cylinders, driving the pistons just as in an ordinary
> petrol engine.
> One of the experts due toexamine the car was Michael Laughton, professor
> of electrical engineering at Queen Mary and Westfield University, London,
> but he was not allowed to see it. "Although Meyer had known about our
> visit weeks in advance, when we arrived he made some lame excuse about why
> the car wasn't working, so it was impossible to evaluate it," said
> Laughton.
> However, the one thing Meyer had built that appeared to work was his Water
> Fuel Cell, and it was this device that the Ohio judge called as evidence in
> the recent lawsuit.
> The cell had been the centrepiece of Meyer's sales pitches. It was a
> transparent cylinder of water inside which was a core of stainless steel
> electrodes. When plugged into an electrical supply,the cell bubbled away
> merrily, producing apparently copious amounts of gas that Meyer ignited
> through a welding torch.To the layman it was an impressive performance and
> hundreds of small investors signed up, but it did not impress three expert
> witnesses in court.
> They decided that there was nothing revolutionary about the cell at all and
> that it was simply using conventional electrolysis.
> Meyer was found guilty of "gross and egregious fraud" and ordered to repay
> the investors their $25,000 (£15,000).
>
> ( Any views ? )
>
> --
> ..Every breadth we draw, every step we take, every thought we think,
> every sound or word we utter and the aeons of grief and oceans of tears
> we've shed for our needs or the secret exquisite pleasures, ease and
> security we seek
> we owe them all to our father cosmos & sun and earth mother !

mike

unread,
Nov 22, 2013, 5:02:26 PM11/22/13
to
On 11/22/2013 1:27 PM, knews4...@yahoo.com wrote:

>
> I was summarily "Flamed" for years HERE as was Michael OHANNON, Tad Johnson, until the appearance of these sites because sci.energy.hydrogen "News Group" was a cesspool of "authority," as to MY PERSONAL FRIEND, Stanley A. Meyer which I first met in 1985 by phone.
> Before I even arrived as PERSONAL EYE WITNESS, with others, to the operation of Meyer's Water Fuel Cell(R)....

THREE SEPERATE TIMES in TWO DIFFERENT LOCATIONS... this "group of
educational 'scientist" etc.,"

DECIDED WITHOUT A SHRED OF EVIDENCE THAT "Meyer is a fraud."
>
> And so it goes.....he is dead....

Great. A real eye witness.
Here's your chance to validate the process.
Describe the experimental setup.
Describe the measurement apparatus and how you verified what
it was measuring and the calibration.
Describe the test.
Describe the data collected...with numbers.
Describe how you analyzed that data to verify the claims.
Describe the arguments used by the detractors to claim fraud.

Times three.

>

Don Lancaster

unread,
Nov 26, 2013, 7:26:37 PM11/26/13
to
A summary of the utterly overwhelming evidence against the water powered
car can be found at
http://www.tinaja.com/whtnu12.shtml#d04-29-12

Curiously, the transcripts of the fraud trial have never been
transcribed, and thus nobody has ever requested a copy of them.
This would obviously be an essential first step in any fraud challenge.

--
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: d...@tinaja.com

Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com

verdee...@gmail.com

unread,
Mar 20, 2018, 5:13:12 PM3/20/18
to
El martes, 3 de diciembre de 1996, 3:00:00 (UTC-5), Harold Wicks escribió:

Daniel HHO Hydrogen Donatelli

unread,
Feb 18, 2021, 6:16:05 AM2/18/21
to
Hello

Wow how times and opinions have changed since the Stanley A Meyer
Estate was saved, stored 10 years , recovered and fully replicated and shown and sold working.

The Army of de centralized home builders successfully with help of internet
spread the knowledge and parts broadly successfully.

The Training online and various on demand hydrogen groups in each country now use his circuits
for HYDROGEN HOT RODDING to save the combustion engines from extinction

IF you want to start your journey of self training and building hs circuits go here
https://www.nikola-truck.com/copy-of-h2-training-guide-1

Daniel
Founder
Secure Supplies
All about Circuit Fan and Client

tony quinn

unread,
Jun 17, 2022, 8:59:19 AMJun 17
to
The information below is derived from the work of genius twin brothers Stanley and Stephen Meyer.Many years of study,reading 42 patents and endless hours of Meyer lectures, documentaries and radio shows gives me the chance to show the heart of their research.
If you want to run your car on water then this is a viable and realistic set of stages to go through to achieve such a goal..
First you must ask yourself why has it not been done in this day and age..A car combustion system that can access the large amount of energy available in electrolysis gas from water.
It is commonly known as Faraday electrolysis. It has high mass conversion losses. Mainly heat.This process alone is a poor option as an engine will not produce enough electricity output to power an electrolysis unit to supply enough gas from the water to realistically cover the car engine's energy requirements..
Many have tried electrolysis gas production methods with very limited success.
So what are the steps to rethink this problem?..
Step 1
Striving for a highly efficient electrolysis cell is the first step.
Your electrolysis cell will not make enough gas to keep the engine running from the car's electrical output.But this is the first step.And the more efficient you make your cell. Be it through the physical construction or efficient driving circuit,or both
Step number 2.
As in step number one you can make gas from your electrolysis cell. This gas fuel starts as water and is converted to gas. The gas is fed into the combustion zone where the second conversion takes place..In the second conversion the gas is converted back to water,with a given amount of energy release.This is the water to gas and gas to water conversions or energy states.
Step three.
We know by now that the first conversion.Water to gas is energy intensive and has a large amount of losses.This is where many hundreds of hours have been spent by people trying endless ways to improve the efficiency of electrolysis. Without taking into account they are dealing with not one mass convention in making the gas. But two mass conventions. Water to gas and gas back to water.
This second energy conversion has been mainly overlooked by the majority of people studying in this area.
So we must take a closer look at this second conversion to see if there are any ways of improving the reaction efficiency at the point of combustion..
Step 3
Conversion factors for gas to water.
It is not well known that the conversion factors for gas to water with an amount of energy released through combustion.This only releases one millionth of the available energy that is in the gases. That is having their mass converted back to water. This is a chain reaction and is quickly shut down and reaches a stable state. The chemicals involved hydrogen and oxygen reach a stable state achieving mass conversion gas to water H2O. At this point the available mass to energy window is closed.
By converting the gas back to water..This water should be then looked on as a waste product of the combustion event..
Step 4
What could be done to reduce this waste byproduct (water).
In theory if you had a 100 percent conversion gas to explosive energy during the second conversion. You would not have any waste. All the gases would be burnt and there would be no byproduct water post combustion..
Step 5
How can this be done? How can we access this chain reaction event and improve its efficiency. If we could improve this mass conversion, just a fraction of a percent. This would vastly reduce the gas input needed. To attain the amount of energy required to run the engine..Less gas is what you will require as opposed to, insufficient gas is the problem.
Note!
Yes, correct Faraday electrolysis makes a gas that you can only access one millionth of its energy through combustion.…
Step 6
How do we look at this inefficient combustion process and make improvements?..
(Chemical reactions!)
Improving combustion to burn more of the available gases.
This step is key!
What is going on during the combustion moment?
Ignition occurs.This sets off a chain reaction that will convert the gas mass back to a liquid mass.(Water). In turn with an amount of explosive energy. As we already know the explosive energy only accounts for one millionth of the possible available energy in the gas fuel. So how do we come up with a system to access more energy from the given amount of fuel?
Step 7...Controlling the combustion event to access larger amounts of energy that are available..
This is done by controlling the combustion moment and extending the chemical reaction in a way to prolong energy release from the gas as it turns to water.
One must note.
Is a combustion engine not a pump. It creates a vacuum at the input manifold and creates a positive pressure at the exhaust manifold.
Hydrogen and oxygen from water is the perfect fuel.Two parts Hydrogen to one part Oxygen.This is the perfect fuel to oxidiser ratio needing no other elements for combustion just fuel with oxidizer. To achieve control of the combustion event you have to control and minimise contamination from other elements. As said above hydrogen and oxygen is the perfect fuel to oxidiser mix.
Something that is mostly unknown about is.The combustion engine can be fueled with hydrogen and oxygen and have the intake manifold completely sealed off. This creates a permanent vacuum in the intake manifold. With the hydrogen and oxygen being delivered into the engine manifold vacuum. An engine like this can be seen in demonstrations online videos..
So now we have hydrogen and oxygen and no other gases at the combustion event.This makes control of the event less complex.
Step 8
How do we make a tool to act upon this simple chain reaction?
Now we get into atoms and molecules.
Is it not true an oxygen atom is 16 times the size of a hydrogen atom. In turn having 16 times the attraction force over an electron than the hydrogen atom. This my friends is your tool to affect the combustion event.
Question is ?
Can we prepare and add oxygen atoms in such a way to the combustion event to improve energy release by way of extending the chain reaction.
Yes this can be done. First you have to have a way to remove electrons from the Oxygen Atom.
Oxygen can be held in a stable state with up to 4 missing electrons by adding the correct light wavelength energy. Removing the electrons can be achieved with the use of a low pressure plasma reactor.
A low pressure plasma reactor will act upon ambient air gases,oxygen,nitrogen,etc. In such a way to bring the constituents of air to what is called chemical resonance.Chemical resonance is a highly charged state whereby elements stop holding on to their electrons and electron sharing occurs. If you can take ambient air gases to chemical resonance. You are halfway to removing electrons from the oxygen atom.
Step 9.Removing electrons from oxygen during chemical resonance.
A plasma reactor consists of two stainless steel electrodes and quartz glass tube. The anode is positioned on the outside of the quartz. And the cathode is inside with a 1mm gap from the quartz. This gap is where the gases are worked upon. In the low pressure plasma zone.
When in use this reactor has an amount of capacitance this is including the charged gases being held at chemical resonance.The gases become part of the reactor circuit capacitance.This capacitance could be considered to be like a single cell of a battery. It takes on capacitance and in turn can be discharged when the power input has stopped. When discharging the reactor's capacitance it is possible to reduce the mass of the plasma excited gases by way of discharging the reactor to a resistive load..
When reactor discharge is engaged the mass of the gases are reduced through a loss of electrons. Oxygen with up to four missing electrons is produced. These gases can be held in a stable state by way of red 660nM light. The low pressure is maintained in the reactor by the engine intake manifold vacuum. It is connected directly to the sealed off intake manifold.
Step 10
How does mass reduced Oxygen atoms extend the opening of the chain reaction window during combustion.
Well remember that the big oxygen atom has 16 times the attraction force compared to the Hydrogen Atom. This is where the Oxygen does work for you. When these processed Oxygen Atoms are added to electrolysis gases Hydrogen and Oxygen during the combustion window. They have such a large attraction force they will overcome the Hydrogens ability to hold on to its electron. And in so forces the Hydrogen to give up its mass to energy. This interaction during the combustion chain reaction causes more mass to be converted and opens the chain reaction window giving access to more than one millionth of the available gas energy. This in turn reduces the amount of byproduct,water in the exhaust..
By adjusting the mixture of fuel and processed gases. Mass reduced Oxygen.
You can now vary not just the gas fuel input. But you can vary the amount of explosive energy per unit of gas fuel.


Stanley Meyer used this method and perfected this fuel gas mix. He reduced the amount of electrolysis gas needed to very small amounts.The water fuel injector was the pinnacle of his achievement regarding using water as fuel
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages