Measuring Joe Cell Fields.
For those people who attended the meeting last year at which Uli and Pierro demonstrated their Joe cell, some may remember some hanging magnets swinging around showing the presence of some type of field. I followed up this technique of measurement with some tests of my own on a couple of cells.I used a round ferrite magnet and hung it from a piece of string as seen in the accompanying photograph. What I found was that if a "Joe cell" was not working correctly, in other words all that was happening was electrolysis, no movement was evident in the magnet. However, when a cell was working as a true "Joe cell", the magnet would oscillate back and forth around the axis of the string. To prove that the field was moving the magnet and not me, I hung it from a rafter in the shed where I was doing the tests. Further tests showed that the magnet would move back and forth with the same amount of deflection whether it was close to the cell or at a distance from it. One would imagine that if it was a conventional magnetic field that was being measured, then further away from the cell, the oscillations should decrease in magnitude. The furthest away from the cell that I could get the magnet to oscillate was about 50 metres. Further than this distance and the magnet would remain still. The rate of oscillation of the magnet was very slow, about once every three seconds.
Pierro demonstrated another device for measuring fields from a Joe cell at a Joe cell group meeting. This was the same device as shown in the drawing below which arrived at my post box from a completely different source in Western Australia. It is constructed of totally non magnetic materials, being either brass or aluminium and consists of a base plate on which is mounted two threaded rods. There are two plates fitted across the threaded rods, the top one has a ferrite magnet attached to it, and the other one has a flat piece of carbon fitted to it. The base has a matching piece of carbon. A neodymium magnet is placed between the two carbon pieces and the two plates are adjusted so that the magnet "floats". When exposed to a working Joe cell, this magnet oscillates or spins in a similar fashion to the hanging magnet described above. I don't know who initially designed this device or what the purpose of the carbon is.
Recently I was given a copy of a patent No.4,394,230 by Henry Puharich. This patent described a sparkplug replacement type device for running combustion engines on hydrogen produced on demand from water, similar to Stan Meyers device, but released in 1983, many years before Stan's patent. In this patent is the mention of the "WATER NUCLEAR SPIN RELAXATION CONSTANT=3 SECONDS". I find this very interesting as the rate of swing of the magnet near a working Joe cell is 3 seconds! So my question is, does anybody know what this spin relaxation constant is and how it could relate to the Joe cell?
If you have any thoughts or information on the questions posed in this article, please address them to either Bruce firstname.lastname@example.org or Ken. email@example.com
Letters to ASTRO South Australia.
Note: No email addresses will be published in the "Letters to ASTRO" unless requested............Ken
From : Tad Johnson
To : Bruce Tonkin
Subject : Meyer cell experiments
Date : Tue, 14 Aug 2001
Well, like I said, I have had one successful test out of 14 or so failures. The one successful test was performed using a Velleman K8004 PWM kit, this was modified to pulse a bobbin core transformer at 42.8Khz. The final output into the cell was 2KVDC @ 42.8Khz @ 5uA using 1/16 spacing and steam distilled water.
It took me two weeks of trial and error just to obtain resonance since my electronic skills were horrid at the time. I used a ham calc to calculate resonance of the cell. I had also used a tektronics capacitance meter to check capacitance of the cell for calculation, but this proved inaccurate since the cell capacitance floats all over the place. I had to end up verifying capacitance using dielectric constant calculations combined with the capacitance meter ( I returned the meter later since I thought it to be faulty, but this was not the case).
Also, at first I had not taken inductance of the secondary of the bobbin core transformer into account and this threw off my calculations. At the time I didn't know any better, but I was determined to prove this device fact or fraud.
Once all the calculations were correct and the correct size inductors were installed on the cell I could tune the cell to resonance and it would start making gas (albeit not much gas). At the power range I was using on the cell it should have not made any gas at all according to our so called "laws", but it did in fact work as Meyer said. The issue has been sizing up the cell due to the nature of the cell. Capacitance appears to change when the temperature of the cell changes (it gets colder when you start making gas). And thus the cell needs constant tuning via the variable inductor on the anode side.
A man whom I have become good friends with knew Meyer directly and talked with him many times. After his death he was able to talk with Stan's brother in order to help me with my project. His brother told him nothing had been done with the project since Stan's death and he was not sure if anything would be done again with it, but he did say that others had duplicated the technology and it was in his own words "simple to duplicate". This may be true for someone highly adept at electronics, but I was not. Even then, it seems like a very difficult task to get this device to work on a moving vehicle without some very complicated monitoring and tuning circuitry. The later patents show why this is and why Stan moved to other designs in order to produce gas using less complicated and more reliable means. I am of course talking about the "spark plug" electrolysis device, and the steam generator/electrolysis unit.
Until these later devices are duplicated, I feel strongly that the earlier technology is not a viable form of creating large amounts of gas,and thus probably not worth duplicating to a large extent except to simply learn more about the process.
One thing is for certain, this technology works, it can be duplicated and it relies relies solely on resonance for it's function. There is no gas being created without resonance. It is also certain that the higher the voltage, the more gas will be created once resonance is achieved. I have not tried anything higher than 3Kvdc, but it may be possible to get large amounts of gas using somewhere between 5-10Kvdc. Amperage can be almost nil since the amperage of the circuit has absolutely nothing to do with creating gas in this process.
After 5 years of research on this subject I am out of money and will probably not be doing any more work on it until I can find some way to sustain myself and obtain a shop to work in (most of this was done in my home in California, now I am in an apartment in Fort Worth). Until then, I plan on studying the later patents and working on a design using ultrasonics to create a fine, 5micron mist into a small cavity for instant splitting into H2/O2 in larger amounts with less tuning required.
This may also intersect with the EV Gray research in that the power from the Gray circuit may have a better effect on water breakage in a cell of this design. Although a total electrical solution to a prime mover such as the EV Gray/Tesla technology may be a better option than making gas for use in an IC engine, fuel cell, and/or storing it, etc.
As far as the "Joe" cell goes, I supposed the two could be working in similar ways, although I still do not understand this Orgone theory, nor am I sure about my belief in the working of the "Joe" cell. Something strange is occurring with the Meyer device, but the correlation it has to the "Joe" cell is unknown.
From: Bruce McBurney
6665 McLeod Road
Niagara Falls Ont. L2G 3G3905
358-8541 fax aux 905 358-9439
I have found a inventor that has a system that claims over
100 mpg on 7 cars he has a story to tell on suppression and before
he gets suppressed again He is giving all his info for FREE.
while you can the site is not completed but should be done by tuesday
download to disc his patent and as much of the site as you can if you can add it to your site or set up something else it like a miror site .It would be a great blessing to help someone to finally get this info out. With many sites all over the world he may have a chance of getting it out
Do not pass this info on until friday so we all have a chance to copy this amazing info There are many that can not be trusted This is the one time we can win if we do it right and help.
This fall the US government is holding special meetings on fuel mileage and pollution standards we have lobbyists and a group coming out to educate our congressmen and senators on 100 mpg systems
If this is all done with enough peoples help we will all win.
We share the truth and the "right to know"
about all SUPER Carburetors/F.I. This is the
"Solution to the AIR Pollution". Our future
depends on it. GET INVOLVED NOW!
also go to www.get113to138mpg.com while you can
From : "Dan Brennan"
To : "Bruce tonkin"
Subject : Re: joe cell smoky engine
Date : Sat, 1 Sep 2001
My car has two PCV tubes (it is horiz opposed, on each head) One has valve, other free running up into air cleaner. After putting cell on car (for first time)and driving over 220km, car blew oil smoke.
Dan pulls off road. Smoke still. Aircleaner full of oil. Then, check dipstick, no oil. Run car, looking at temp guage waiting for seizure. No seizure, keep driving. Car runs over 200km again lower than normal temp and less fuel. Stoppages, startages. Then, blocked free running pcv tube, replace oil. Car runs hotter. Stoppages, startages. Eventually starts blowing oil again even tho blocked. Dan unblocks and drains oil down to low level (under dipstick). Car runs cooler again, stoppages, startages. then, last time car still ran, (6-7 wees ago) drove over 200km at about 3 times normal fuel economy, but engine running in psycho-interactive way, difficult to keep running.
Next day, car totally stopped all operations. All electricals
malfunctioning on full batt and new batt jumpered up. All fuses
etc Ok, dash / int lights etc fading in/out for a few days then
totally nothing. This has been state of affairs up to now, car
still US, no electricals. This week will prob try new batt, leads
etc, (may try to split pos with 3 batts) have been charging cell
etc, interesting results. Am looking to again have car operational,
not sure how. Note for example that trad use of "sparking
block" in my case WILL NOT OCCUR Some unusual elec stuff
is going on, no sparks, all connections ok, new batt etc, eg ....with
car batt removed, new batt with jumper leads from neg term to
car neg batt strap, pos lead from pos batt terminal ....no spark
even at CLAMP ON NEG JUMPER LEAD where connected to car neg chassis
batt strap when touched with pos jumper lead clamp. Obviously
all car elecs also have no chance of operation if current wont
flow even in jumper lead connected to chassis. I reckon if I can
get more charging action etc in the cell and reconnect with new
batts, split the positive or reverse polarity etc something or
other one day might happen again.
Clearly Joe cell has some function, exactly what or how not fully known by me.
Will try to letya know what happens next....
I would like to thank Bruce, Dan
and Tad for taking the time
to write, it is much appreciated.
Mail welcome firstname.lastname@example.org
ASTRO MEETING Friday Sept the 14th 2001
No Peter's Page this month.
Peter's Page will be back next month.
ASTRO Home Page
(Newsletter and Web Page)
Phone 08 83872845
ASTRO Photo Album
DISCLAIMER: All information given in this newsletter is for educational purposes only. No claims are made on or for the validity or correctness of the material provided. ASTRO S.A. Incorporated accepts no responsibility for any mishaps or accidents incurred by any persons utilising this information.