James.
  About the unit charge. Is it static electricity? Could you notice it with a
compass? (is it a magnetic field ).
Could possibly the HE (lutron switch) do the same thing?
I noticed when I put the lutron switch to charge the oil in my ICE that the
compass changed direction when I held it around the engine.
(Have not noticed any change in performance or fuel consumtion )
Thanks  Sture

--- In joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com, "jgosscacc1" <jgosscacc@...>
wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> Lately I've been testing the ability of a Joe cell that's charged with unit
charge to transfer charge to remote objects. Charge can be transferred to nearby
metal objects that are in contact with the cell's vapor. However, transferring
charge this way has a very limited range.
>
> I've recently tested charge transfer as a result of a cell's electric field.
An electric field developed by a cell's unit charge can reach out quite some
distance from the cell. Any metal object within that field can receive charge if
relative motion is involved.
>
> Even though ampacity of a cell's unit charge is very low in value; the cell's
electric field still has the same density as a field produced by a charge having
a higher ampacity rating. Transferring charge by induction instead of vapor
contact doesn't relieve a cell of its unit charge value, as does charge by vapor
contact. A cell's field is very; very sensitive and the least bit of disruption
will cause the field to collapse. This is due to its low ampacity capability,
and basically if the cell must suddenly furnish current from its unit charge;
the field collapses.
>
> Charge transfer by induction means that nothing actually touches the cell, or
even has to come near it. Charge can be transferred time and time again and the
cell doesn't loose its field. A cell can develop unit charge up to two hundred
volts or so; even with fresh water in the cell. As a cell conditions the water;
unit charge can increase to over 1,000 volts. How high it goes after that is
basically determined by the water and the cell's environment.
>
> With a self generated unit charge of 200 volts on the cell I've been
experimenting with; its field extends out about two feet in all directions. With
a 500 volt charge I can measure its presence up to eight feet. At 1,000 volts
the field extends out to over 10 feet. I personally can't perceive the field; I
use other methods to actually measure its strength.
>
> Any electrically neutral metal object that's isolated from earth ground, and
approaches a charged cell will become stressed to produce a positive charge. If
that same object is placed near the cell while still electrically neutral, and
then recedes away from the cell; it becomes stressed to produce a negative
charge. Once a cell's unit charge induces charge into a nearby metal object,
that object then has the ability to induce charge into yet another metal object.
This can be repeated on down the line.
>
> It appears that unit charge polarity had no relationship with pH of the water.
I tested the cell water with both extremes of pH; basic and acidic. In each case
unit charge developed with positive polarity. I might have mentioned before that
cell polarity doesn't change the polarity for unit charge either, at least for
this cell with the water it's using at this time. Both straight and reverse cell
polarity yields a positive unit charge.
>
> Thanks,
> James Goss
>

Hello Sture,

"About the unit charge. Is it static electricity? Could you notice it with a
compass? (is it a magnetic field )."

Yes the unit charge on a cell is a static charge. Unit charge produces an
electric field; thus it would not interact with a magnetic field, a compass will
not sense electric fields.

"Could possibly the HE (lutron switch) do the same thing?
I noticed when I put the lutron switch to charge the oil in my ICE that the
compass changed direction when I held it around the engine."

Speaking electrically, and not in terms of torsion fields; the dimmer switch
Robert used basically applies 14 volts dc to the oil at all times. No matter
what speed the fan switch is set on; the alternator's output bus supplies 14
volts to the oil. This is because oil is an insulator and basically no current
flows through it with only a 14 volt potential across it. With no current
flowing there is no voltage drop within the dimmer switch; the 14 volts is
dropped across the oil.

As for electrical activity, the 14 volts could be connected directly to the oil
without the dimmer switch, and have the same electric field established between
the oil probe and engine ground as that developed when using the dimmer switch.

When checking static magnetic fields around an engine there are a lot of
variables that can influence a compass; as well as a gauss meter. Permanent
magnet electric motors used for radiator fans and windshield wipers are a couple
that can influence a compass just about anywhere under the hood. If the engine
is running; the alternator also puts out a strong static magnetic field from its
rotor coil. The static field from an alternator will change from time to time
depending on its electrical load. The voltage regulator will apply more or less
voltage to the alternator's rotor coil as it regulates the 14 volt bus. There is
no indication when this happens and can appear to be a change in block
magnetism.

Thus everything electrically has to be evaluated and have some idea what
magnetic fields are active at the time the check is made.

Thanks,
James Goss

James,

In theory, if such a cell with static charge, were in a car passing you, your compass would move perpendicular to the motional vector. Is that correct? As the car passes or goes around you the compass may be seen to be set into a spin???

There is one vibrational programming method I have found that will cause the cell to radiate magnetic nodes. The earth field.

In this mode the water begins to drop faster then normal.

By electronics theory, there must be a moving charge present to cause this.

http://www.resonantfractals.org/Light_Being/Earth_CFS.html

In this method 8 shifts of pi/2 is summed against 10 shifts of phi, to derrive a wavelength ratio, which produces magnetic nodes where the water is added to the cell.

This is the only case I have personally seen a cell become strongly magnetic. Indicating a magnetic field can be created by a diamagnetic field if water is present.

Dave L

--- In joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com, "jgosscacc1" <jgosscacc@...> wrote:
>
> Hello Sture,
>
> "About the unit charge. Is it static electricity? Could you notice it with a compass? (is it a magnetic field )."
>
> Yes the unit charge on a cell is a static charge. Unit charge produces an electric field; thus it would not interact with a magnetic field, a compass will not sense electric fields.
>
> "Could possibly the HE (lutron switch) do the same thing?
> I noticed when I put the lutron switch to charge the oil in my ICE that the compass changed direction when I held it around the engine."
>
> Speaking electrically, and not in terms of torsion fields; the dimmer switch Robert used basically applies 14 volts dc to the oil at all times. No matter what speed the fan switch is set on; the alternator's output bus supplies 14 volts to the oil. This is because oil is an insulator and basically no current flows through it with only a 14 volt potential across it. With no current flowing there is no voltage drop within the dimmer switch; the 14 volts is dropped across the oil.
>
> As for electrical activity, the 14 volts could be connected directly to the oil without the dimmer switch, and have the same electric field established between the oil probe and engine ground as that developed when using the dimmer switch.
>
> When checking static magnetic fields around an engine there are a lot of variables that can influence a compass; as well as a gauss meter. Permanent magnet electric motors used for radiator fans and windshield wipers are a couple that can influence a compass just about anywhere under the hood. If the engine is running; the alternator also puts out a strong static magnetic field from its rotor coil. The static field from an alternator will change from time to time depending on its electrical load. The voltage regulator will apply more or less voltage to the alternator's rotor coil as it regulates the 14 volt bus. There is no indication when this happens and can appear to be a change in block magnetism.
>
> Thus everything electrically has to be evaluated and have some idea what magnetic fields are active at the time the check is made.
>
> Thanks,
> James Goss
>

James.
Thanks for your answer.
I will do some more messurments with the compass to see if the magnetic field
changes or if it is stable.

Thanks  Sture

--- In joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com, "jgosscacc1" <jgosscacc@...>
wrote:
>
> Hello Sture,
>
> "About the unit charge. Is it static electricity? Could you notice it with a
compass? (is it a magnetic field )."
>
> Yes the unit charge on a cell is a static charge. Unit charge produces an
electric field; thus it would not interact with a magnetic field, a compass will
not sense electric fields.
>
> "Could possibly the HE (lutron switch) do the same thing?
> I noticed when I put the lutron switch to charge the oil in my ICE that the
compass changed direction when I held it around the engine."
>
> Speaking electrically, and not in terms of torsion fields; the dimmer switch
Robert used basically applies 14 volts dc to the oil at all times. No matter
what speed the fan switch is set on; the alternator's output bus supplies 14
volts to the oil. This is because oil is an insulator and basically no current
flows through it with only a 14 volt potential across it. With no current
flowing there is no voltage drop within the dimmer switch; the 14 volts is
dropped across the oil.
>
> As for electrical activity, the 14 volts could be connected directly to the
oil without the dimmer switch, and have the same electric field established
between the oil probe and engine ground as that developed when using the dimmer
switch.
>
> When checking static magnetic fields around an engine there are a lot of
variables that can influence a compass; as well as a gauss meter. Permanent
magnet electric motors used for radiator fans and windshield wipers are a couple
that can influence a compass just about anywhere under the hood. If the engine
is running; the alternator also puts out a strong static magnetic field from its
rotor coil. The static field from an alternator will change from time to time
depending on its electrical load. The voltage regulator will apply more or less
voltage to the alternator's rotor coil as it regulates the 14 volt bus. There is
no indication when this happens and can appear to be a change in block
magnetism.
>
> Thus everything electrically has to be evaluated and have some idea what
magnetic fields are active at the time the check is made.
>
> Thanks,
> James Goss
>

Hello David,

"In theory, if such a cell with static charge, were in a car passing you, your
compass would move perpendicular to the motional vector. Is that correct? As the
car passes or goes around you the compass may be seen to be set into a spin???"

Run that by me again Dave. Are you saying a static electric field having
relative motion in respect to a compass will move the compass needle?

Thanks,
James

Is that not the basic theory of EM?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zy0VHBXxLU&feature=related

Here is a good video, showing the concept of a "Force" operating at 90 degrees to the E and B fields.

Charge in motion creates a magnetic field.

In copper or Aluminum it's called current or amps. Magnetic field is a direct function of the current. Current is the flow of electron charge in columbs. The force however is at 90 degrees, the motion of the aluminum foil, that we could call the resultant useful power. Electrons flow through the foil and the foil is pushed with a Force sideways of the current flow interacting with the magnetic field.

I have never built a wormhurst machine. Does it produce magnetic fields when the wheel is spining? Does it cause a compass to move parallel the the axis of the machine?

There are all kinds of experiments out there showing the right and left hand rules of EM. The pressure vector [motion], is at right angles to the E and B fields.

What is not always aparent to people working the E and B field to produce motion, is that the motion can also produce the E or B field if acted on by one of the others field.

If a charged particle is shot through an electric field it will deflect in a parabolic curve.

If a charged partical is shot through a magnetic field it will deflect in a circular curve.

A compass is a weak magnet. If a charged partical shoots by it with a directional motion crossing its center, the magnet should align 90 degrees to the motional vector.

If the magnet were stronger in the compass, and fixed tightly the charged particle would then be deflected instead as it passes by.

A charged particle the size of a car, should deflect the compass to 90 degrees as it passes by on the road. Best guess.

Dave L

--- In joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com, "jgosscacc1" <jgosscacc@...> wrote:
>
> Hello David,
>
> "In theory, if such a cell with static charge, were in a car passing you, your compass would move perpendicular to the motional vector. Is that correct? As the car passes or goes around you the compass may be seen to be set into a spin???"
>
> Run that by me again Dave. Are you saying a static electric field having relative motion in respect to a compass will move the compass needle?
>
> Thanks,
> James
>

Hello David,

Yep, I have used that exact demonstration hundreds of times in the classroom to
illustrate motor action. I always used the original right and left hand rules,
right hand for motors and left hand for generators; both for negative charge
transfer. Using three fingers on each hand instead of two fingers and palm of
the hand as the guy in the video.

Did you answer his question at the end of the demonstration, what would happen
if the foil was aligned with the magnet field flux?

I understand what you were describing now Dave. My statement that an electric
field and magnetic field do not interact was referenced to both fields being in
a static state; such as placing a stationary compass in an intense static
electric field. I tested this by placing a compass in an electric field having a
strength of 150,000 volts per meter; the compass didn't react.

In your example, the static charge in the vehicle was moving as the vehicle
passed by the other vehicle containing the compass. Would the speed of relative
motion between the two be enough to show change in compass alignment?

I had never thought about using the Whimshurst generator to see if a compass
would react with its rotating charged discs. The discs on my machine are 12 inch
in diameter and rotate at 1,200 rpm, separated by 1/8 inch. Each disc has its
own drive motor. The machine had been setting idle for a while so it needed a
little tuning up to get it going again. It was a very humid day, which made it
even more difficult to get it to kick off. Putting a little heat on the discs
got it going. Arc gaps were set for near 6 inches.

Approaching the discs with a compass yielded no interaction. I was wondering
Dave that since the two discs are rotating counter to each other, and separated
by only 1/8 inch; would the compass see the two counter rotating fields as being
stationary? I guess another possibility would be that the speed of relative
motion is still not great enough.

Thanks,
James Goss

James,

So as far as the HV experiments, we see the cell can create a climbing unit charge and hold it, but we can not link HV static fields with magnetic fields of any apreciable power level. Static HV is not what is turning the compasses of JC  work. One question is, what is turning the compasses then? There are always the fables about someone who is powering their house with a JC, and if true this is yet to be revealed. I have done one repeatable experiment connecting the magnetic field with water in the cells.

According to my vibration work spread sheet, there is a ratio of wavelengths which will produce a magnetic field, and move a compass using water as the medium. In the application to cell tubes, adding the water causes the magnetic field to appear, if this ratio is present between the vibrations on any two of the tubes and a third is present vertically having a 7.11 downshift ratio. It requires three wavelengths crossing geometrically in the water. The magnetic field appears to be a static field as well, it does not rotate and the compass is stationary.

From our EM training, this indicates there must be a circular motion or rotation of charge on the cell for this to happen. You are showing us how the cell creates these static charges, but until they are set to motion, they will not create a magnetic field. And further the motion of charge must be a circle for a magnetic field to appear as a source dipole.

A magnetic field will move a charged particle in a circular curve, and an electric field will move a charged particle in a parabolic curve that will not repeat without using a resonant circuit to make it oscillate electrically. There must then be a flow of either electrons or protons or both, in the water of this particular cell creating a very large magnet. This charge is then moving around the rings of the cell in some way through the water gaps with a circular path of some kind.

This phenomena is not related to bubbles, but to the atoms of the water.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------------------

The cell tubes can be cut to a multiple of the G fractal above. 74.5 mm . I have a cell that is a 2x on all it's tubes, which created a very strong magnetic field.

Adjacent tubes are then vibrated up with two calipers, using the inner and outer fractal lengths on inner and outer tubes. [Only two tubes are necessary.]

I also used a one inch and a two inch 316 SS tubes, at 1 foot long and did this experiment with a moderatly strong magnetic field resulting  on the ends of the cell.

------------------------------------------------------------------

A monopole magnetic node now rises up on the cell, and it will "snap" a compass, and create a small pocket of space that will also bend light like a lense.  It's a bit scarry also to see the cell becomming a magnet, because in JC work we try to avoid magnetizing the metals. However if you take it apart you will discover the 316 metals have not become magnetized at all.

I did have a problem with the outer can magnetizing and holding the magnetic field, it is cheaper cooking SS, but the 316 did not magnetisze.

------------------------------------------------------------------

The concept of treating "motion" as a field only works if you see the motion as a vibration inside a material. The cell does not move, but the magnetic field is present.

99.9 percent of the mass [weight] of all atoms is at the tiny center nucleus and is in a state of vibration, free floating in that atoms fields. If this motion can move to the surface of the atom the electron shell will also now begin to move, and in water it can then physically move the charge.

To alter a back and forth vibration, to become a circular vibration, requires vibrations crossing at 90 degrees in 2 dimensions. Only a circular curving motion of charge can create a magnetic field. In the 3rd dimension then the magnetic poles appear.

Vibration apparently has ability to move charge. Or to cause a static electric field, to become a dynamic magnetic field, in water medium.

------------------------------------------------------------------- 

In a coherently vibrating field, the motion or T field couples across all the atoms, and at this point the charge can then move over it, and is no longer static. This is incredibly simple because everyone has a feel for motion naturally.

This is the very core process of Teslas wireless power transmission system. The voltage, can move across a coherent T field coupled system. The nature of the T field is a vibration at 90 degrees to the E and B fields.

Propagation of the T field is done using distance coupling methods, and the path is radiant, or straight line methods, and the wavelengths are rock solid in dimension. This is why the polygon tube cutting formulas work so well.

At a wavelength approaching the thickness of the tubes, only a caliper is necessary to inject a wavelength. [Or a person using intuitive methods.]

If two wavelengths across two tubes contain a pi/2 ratio as a [math sum] the vibrations will self sustain. The pi/2 must be present only as a [sum] of the resultant wavelength used.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Just as electronics has formulas and injection techniques, to set it up in circuits, T field has formulas and injection techniques, to set it up on mass vibrational elements.

The main difference, is that the power of the vibration can be derrived from the atoms, and no external power is necessary to sustain them. Free energy is then likely a byproduct of understanding how to use vibration with the EM field. Without the "motion" the static fields will not do much of anything.

Joe Cells probably work,  for intuitives, without using any math formulas, because the tubes can hold these natural self sustaining vibrational forms once set up in them, once the wavelengths "being felt" are shorter then the thickness of the tubes.

Pi/2 "feels" like a life force presence with vibration work, and denotes you have achieved the circular path of "vibration of charge" in two dimensions.

Dave L

--- In joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com, "jgosscacc1" <jgosscacc@...> wrote:
>
> Hello David,
>
> Yep, I have used that exact demonstration hundreds of times in the classroom to illustrate motor action. I always used the original right and left hand rules, right hand for motors and left hand for generators; both for negative charge transfer. Using three fingers on each hand instead of two fingers and palm of the hand as the guy in the video.
>
> Did you answer his question at the end of the demonstration, what would happen if the foil was aligned with the magnet field flux?
>
> I understand what you were describing now Dave. My statement that an electric field and magnetic field do not interact was referenced to both fields being in a static state; such as placing a stationary compass in an intense static electric field. I tested this by placing a compass in an electric field having a strength of 150,000 volts per meter; the compass didn't react.
>
> In your example, the static charge in the vehicle was moving as the vehicle passed by the other vehicle containing the compass. Would the speed of relative motion between the two be enough to show change in compass alignment?
>
> I had never thought about using the Whimshurst generator to see if a compass would react with its rotating charged discs. The discs on my machine are 12 inch in diameter and rotate at 1,200 rpm, separated by 1/8 inch. Each disc has its own drive motor. The machine had been setting idle for a while so it needed a little tuning up to get it going again. It was a very humid day, which made it even more difficult to get it to kick off. Putting a little heat on the discs got it going. Arc gaps were set for near 6 inches.
>
> Approaching the discs with a compass yielded no interaction. I was wondering Dave that since the two discs are rotating counter to each other, and separated by only 1/8 inch; would the compass see the two counter rotating fields as being stationary? I guess another possibility would be that the speed of relative motion is still not great enough.
>
> Thanks,
> James Goss
>

Vibrational Charge

If we have two objects that when brought together create a vibration of motion between them, now if we hold one of the objects still by anchoring it to the ground, the other object will vibrate up with the motional field. Conversly if we anchor only the other object then the first one will vibrate up physically, as the second one is held stationary. The motional energy can manifest on ether object by holding the other one still and restricting it's movement.

This is very simple to visualize, and does not require complex math to understand. However we start to obsevre things "hard to explain" where if we work on a specific thing, the energy flees to another nearby thing.

Now if we have two tubes, that when brought together in a cell, cause one another to vibrate up, the same should be observed. The vibration energy will move towards the smaller mass element which is easier to vibrate up, and the electric field will want to move to the greater area where it's charge can spread out.

There is a natural seperation of charge from vibration, in the cells. Vibration energy naturally moves to the center tube.

Now tapping the voltage on the cell we note, it has little power and can possibly, at best,  light an LED on a large 1 foot cell with 8 " tubes.

Conversly routing the vibration component from the center tube, into an engine, it can increase horespower, and cut fuel costs easilly be 20 to 30 percent. [This has been measured over time and is a real phenomina.]

From this, one is forced to conclude there is more [potiential energy] in the vibration, then in the voltage or EM component of a JC, once they are seperated on the cell.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Looking closer down into the atoms, we can only get EM power from motion, if the EM is on the electron shell creating a magnetic field strong enough to get outside the atom. So if we anchor the outer electron shell of atoms into a "solid mass like a tube", the motion of the vibration will move into the center of the atoms, and the electric field will move to the outside of the atoms. The voltages of a cell appear on the tubes. Adding the water now changes this balance.

In diamagnetic elements, like waters hydrogen, we have access to grabbing the inner Proton shell and coupling it beween atoms to form coherent vibrational fields that reach outside the atom also as diamagnetic fields. If this field is then held stationary in some way or a countering resistance ratio vibration is created against it [opposing phase], the vibration will then move to the outside of the atoms, and in water it can actually create motion of the electron shells charge. A generator.

The function of the SS tubes is to anchor the vibration of the inner layers of the waters atoms, so the vibration moves to the surface of the atoms, becomming a coherent large field. Remember the vibration created between the electron shell and nucleus will move its energy, if we try to stop it's motion on one of the two shells. The energy moves towards the atomic shell that is less restricted to motion. This is also how Hammel cones operate where the Aluminum is floating in a magnetic field.

Whether this vibration that comes up from the water creates a magnetic field or not depends totally on the ratio of wavelengths in the 3 dimensions.

People who work with cells consciously as an art can often "feel" these vibrational ratios, and the sensation is the same as "chi flow" in the healing arts. Once a person has been attuned to a vibrational pattern, they can remember how it feels, and in this process learn to shoot it out their hands. If people profecient in chi work are introduced to caliper work, it become natural to start recording distances. Most sensetives however seem to resist this concept at first, and desire the chi to remian unexplained as a geometric vibrational field, defined only as a Spiritual or conscious phenomena.

It can also be created using the math and very accurate programming of the wavelengths using only distance as a field force, within the Aether medium.

This is "too simple," for the trained mind to grasp at first. We can set up distances between objects and create large fields of energy. People have been arranging rocks and stones for a long time to do these things. Now we have a formula for creating a magnetic field using the same methods if water is present.

It is likely now, as I observe this, the earths magnetic field we can measure almost everywhere, with a compass, probably involves the oceans and water table, as much as it does the earths core. The "telluric current" drops in dry earth.

Dave L

Dave L,

"The cell tubes can be cut to a multiple of the G fractal above. 74.5 mm. I have
a cell that is a 2x on all it's tubes, which created a very strong magnetic
field. Adjacent tubes are then vibrated up with two calipers, using the inner
and outer fractal lengths on inner and outer tubes. [Only two tubes are
necessary.]"

Dave I would like to try and duplicate your experiment which yielded a magnetic
field.

Questions: I have some 316 SS tubes, 6 inches long, which is basically 2x of the
74.5mm. Is that close enough?

Are the cell tubes wet or dry when they display a magnetic field? Have you tried
damp only?

What material do you have your cell setting on?

Do you place charge on the cell at any time during the process?

Finely, what are the clockwise and counterclockwise notations for fractal
lengths telling me?

Thanks,
James

 
> "The cell tubes can be cut to a multiple of the G fractal above. 74.5 mm. I have a cell that is a 2x on all it's tubes, which created a very strong magnetic field. Adjacent tubes are then vibrated up with two calipers, using the inner and outer fractal lengths on inner and outer tubes. [Only two tubes are necessary.]"
>
> Dave I would like to try and duplicate your experiment which yielded a magnetic field.
>
> Questions: I have some 316 SS tubes, 6 inches long, which is basically 2x of the 74.5mm. Is that close enough?

Gravity length: 1x= 2.93307, 2x= 5.86614"
It will only work at 6" if you use two correctly cut wires or set calipers to program the vibration onto the two tubes simultaniously.
 

> Are the cell tubes wet or dry when they display a magnetic field? Have you tried damp only?

They must be wet to create the magnetic field. I have not tried damp only.

> What material do you have your cell setting on?

A pressboard cabinet, with formica top surface, and or a steel bench on rubber wheels.

> Do you place charge on the cell at any time during the process? 

With the normal 4 tube cell specially cut, I did charge it up with 5 volts normally before programming in the frequencies. In the other test with the two 1 foot long tubes, the tubes sat right on the bottom of the SS canister, shorted together at first, and then later I stuck a flat plastic sheet under them.

I do not think adding the voltage was necessary to get the magnetic field to come up.
It came up after I added the water, and then touched the ends of the 1' tubes simultaniously with the 2 G fractal calipers.

> Finely, what are the clockwise and counterclockwise notations for fractal lengths telling me?

See the video, where the caliper turns CCW. Bottom of this document.

http://www.resonantfractals.org/Light_Being/Earth_CFS.html

One of the lengths actually torques CW and the other one torques CCW in this experiment, as the three dimensions are perfectly aligned.

Dave L

Also in that document you can see the 1 foot long SS tubes I used there in the smaller SS canister, showing how light is bent as you sight down the long tube crossing past the cell.

The tubes are programmed using calipers or specially cut lengths of SS, or even copper wires cut to length accurately.

First you set up the CW and CCW lengths, stick the smaller wavelength on the inner tube and the larger wavelength on the outer tube simultaniously, they will self sustain one another after the calipers or wires are removed.

Lastly you set up two calipers to the G fractal and hit both tubes simultaniously with that wavelength if the tubes are not cut accurately to 7.45 cm x.

After the cell was pumping out magnetic field, then in the short video at the bottom, you see the three calipers as they were set up to program the cell. The two on the table are stacked so the center of each gap is aligned. As the longer G fractal runs vertically down through these two centers, the top caliper spins CCW as the alignment hits a perfect 90 degree angle at the center.

It's very simple, the three lengths couple into the earths core, and each one charges up differently. The two are running flat with the surface of the earth, and the G length is vertical.

Dave L

--- In joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com, "David Lowrance" <libra_spirit@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "The cell tubes can be cut to a multiple of the G fractal above. 74.5
> mm. I have a cell that is a 2x on all it's tubes, which created a very
> strong magnetic field. Adjacent tubes are then vibrated up with two
> calipers, using the inner and outer fractal lengths on inner and outer
> tubes. [Only two tubes are necessary.]"
> >
> > Dave I would like to try and duplicate your experiment which yielded a
> magnetic field.
> >
> > Questions: I have some 316 SS tubes, 6 inches long, which is basically
> 2x of the 74.5mm. Is that close enough?
>
> Gravity length: 1x= 2.93307, 2x= 5.86614"
> It will only work at 6" if you use two correctly cut wires or set
> calipers to program the vibration onto the two tubes simultaniously.
>
>
> > Are the cell tubes wet or dry when they display a magnetic field? Have
> you tried damp only?
>
> They must be wet to create the magnetic field. I have not tried damp
> only.
>
>
> > What material do you have your cell setting on?
>
> A pressboard cabinet, with formica top surface, and or a steel bench on
> rubber wheels.
>
>
> > Do you place charge on the cell at any time during the process?
>
> With the normal 4 tube cell specially cut, I did charge it up with 5
> volts normally before programming in the frequencies. In the other test
> with the two 1 foot long tubes, the tubes sat right on the bottom of the
> SS canister, shorted together at first, and then later I stuck a flat
> plastic sheet under them.
>
> I do not think adding the voltage was necessary to get the magnetic
> field to come up.
> It came up after I added the water, and then touched the ends of the 1'
> tubes simultaniously with the 2 G fractal calipers.
>
> > Finely, what are the clockwise and counterclockwise notations for
> fractal lengths telling me?
>
> See the video, where the caliper turns CCW. Bottom of this document.
>
> http://www.resonantfractals.org/Light_Being/Earth_CFS.html
> <http://www.resonantfractals.org/Light_Being/Earth_CFS.html>
>
> One of the lengths actually torques CW and the other one torques CCW in
> this experiment, as the three dimensions are perfectly aligned.
>
> Dave L
>

Dave,

Have you checked your electronic SS calipers for magnetism? My calipers are made
by General; it's stainless, but is magnetic to some degree. The small slide bar
seems to hold the greatest magnetism. In one spot it registered near 15 gauss.
Multiple locations measure between 3 and 6 gauss.

James

James,

Mine are both quite magnetic. If you set it to the Earth Dynamo length,
3.63mm and touch it against other metals some strange phenomena seem to
occur. They're strong enough to really whip my cheap floating ball compass
all over the place. At one time I even saw the jaw have one pole in the
center, and the opposite pole at both ends. I've been tempted to try to
degauss them and start fresh, but I was afraid the degausser might damage
the electronics.

Bernie

-----Original Message-----
From: joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of jgosscacc1
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2012 10:23 AM
To: joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Joe Cell Free Energy Device] Re: A Joe cell's electric field

Dave,

Have you checked your electronic SS calipers for magnetism? My calipers are
made by General; it's stainless, but is magnetic to some degree. The small
slide bar seems to hold the greatest magnetism. In one spot it registered
near 15 gauss. Multiple locations measure between 3 and 6 gauss.

James




------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links



-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2176 / Virus Database: 2425/5000 - Release Date: 05/15/12

Bernie,

If your calipers are like mine; there is one small stop screw that allows the
electronic pack and small slide bar to be removed from the main chassis. There
is a small leaf spring about 2 inches long that will fall out. It goes at the
top of the pack where the lock screw clamps down and locks the slide in place.

James

Those three caliper setting ended up with magnetic fields running all
over them in patterns I have never seen before.

Side to side poles on the width of the calipers.

Also the cell can ended up with magnetic fields on it too.

To my knowledge those magnetic fields were not present before the
experiment, and the cell did not move a compass.

In the video, the residual magnetic fields on the calipers do not appear
to be strong enough to spin that caliper the way it does. Magnetic
fields work at closer distances, and pull straight between the calipers
rather then torquing around like that.

Dave L


--- In joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com, "jgosscacc1"
<jgosscacc@...> wrote:
>
> Dave,
>
> Have you checked your electronic SS calipers for magnetism? My
calipers are made by General; it's stainless, but is magnetic to some
degree. The small slide bar seems to hold the greatest magnetism. In one
spot it registered near 15 gauss. Multiple locations measure between 3
and 6 gauss.
>
> James
>

Hello all,

Previously I mentioned placing a cell cap above a cell to increase its unit
charge. Here is more information concerning cell caps.

Cell caps appear to have major influence on the amount of unit charge a cell can
develop. An increase of more than 500 percent in unit charge can occur with this
simple add on. Here is an example: If a cell can generate 500 volts of unit
charge without a cell cap, with a cell cap it can perhaps produce near 3,000
volts or more.

I was checking a cell which had a 500 volt charge. There was another cell
identical to the one being used setting nearby. I decided to place it directly
on top of the energized cell to see if anything would change. It rested on the
upper insulators of the lower cell and was in the water about .5 inches. Unit
charge began to increase and in about ten minutes it had reached 2,200 volts.
The next day I wanted to see if it was repeatable; I ran the same test two more
times. Each time unit charge reached near 3,000 volts; thus it appears to be
repeatable.

I was wondering why having two cells stacked vertically with the lower cell in
water and the upper cell dry; all except for the .5 inch at its bottom; would
increase unit charge. I decided to remove the upper cell and replace it with
only one 4 inch diameter cylinder instead of all four cylinders. This produced
the same results as did the four cylinder cell, unit charge reached near 3,000
volts in about the same amount of time.

As stated in an earlier post I had connected an uncharged cell to large metal
objects with a jumper wire and the objects also become charged to the exact same
value as the cell charges, but not more. This seems to indicate that it is not
simply metal mass connected to the cell that encourages greater unit charge.
Having the upper cylinder in direct contact with cell water seems to be the
difference.

A more recent test has shown that a cell does not require a cylinder on top in
order to obtain voltage gain. I placed the ends of a 4 inch wide aluminum sheet
into the outer perimeter of the cell water. The sheet curved over the top of the
cell and back into the water on the other side; kind of like a rainbow. The
center of the sheet was about 8 inches above the cell top. This arrangement
allowed the cell to also develop near 3,000 volts. It also improved charge time
so the cell was charging at a rate of between 200 and 300 volts per minute.

No matter what shape or style cell cap is being used, it does one thing for
sure; it creates an electric field above the cell that has the same polarity as
the cell.

Thanks,
James Goss

Hallo James

Is that extension a 'collector' 'aerial' or is it neutral or is it a disperser?

Does it matter how high it is? or how short it is?

fascinated,

Tony

On 20 May 2012 at 3:30, jgosscacc1 wrote about :
Subject : [Joe Cell Free Energy Device] Re: U

> Hello all,
>
> Previously I mentioned placing a cell cap above a cell to increase its
> unit charge. Here is more information concerning cell caps.
>
> Cell caps appear to have major influence on the amount of unit charge a
> cell can develop. An increase of more than 500 percent in unit charge can
> occur with this simple add on. Here is an example: If a cell can generate
> 500 volts of unit charge without a cell cap, with a cell cap it can
> perhaps produce near 3,000 volts or more.
>
> I was checking a cell which had a 500 volt charge. There was another cell
> identical to the one being used setting nearby. I decided to place it
> directly on top of the energized cell to see if anything would change. It
> rested on the upper insulators of the lower cell and was in the water
> about .5 inches. Unit charge began to increase and in about ten minutes it
> had reached 2,200 volts. The next day I wanted to see if it was
> repeatable; I ran the same test two more times. Each time unit charge
> reached near 3,000 volts; thus it appears to be repeatable.
>
> I was wondering why having two cells stacked vertically with the lower
> cell in water and the upper cell dry; all except for the .5 inch at its
> bottom; would increase unit charge. I decided to remove the upper cell and
> replace it with only one 4 inch diameter cylinder instead of all four
> cylinders. This produced the same results as did the four cylinder cell,
> unit charge reached near 3,000 volts in about the same amount of time.
>
> As stated in an earlier post I had connected an uncharged cell to large
> metal objects with a jumper wire and the objects also become charged to
> the exact same value as the cell charges, but not more. This seems to
> indicate that it is not simply metal mass connected to the cell that
> encourages greater unit charge. Having the upper cylinder in direct
> contact with cell water seems to be the difference.
>
> A more recent test has shown that a cell does not require a cylinder on
> top in order to obtain voltage gain. I placed the ends of a 4 inch wide
> aluminum sheet into the outer perimeter of the cell water. The sheet
> curved over the top of the cell and back into the water on the other side;
> kind of like a rainbow. The center of the sheet was about 8 inches above
> the cell top. This arrangement allowed the cell to also develop near 3,000
> volts. It also improved charge time so the cell was charging at a rate of
> between 200 and 300 volts per minute.
>
> No matter what shape or style cell cap is being used, it does one thing
> for sure; it creates an electric field above the cell that has the same
> polarity as the cell.
>
> Thanks,
> James Goss
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Hello Tony,

The top cap supports, which hold the cap in place, originate in the cell water
and extend upward. This means the cell and cap will always have the same charge
value at any given time. Both the cell and its cap become a common unit of
single point positive charge. The cap cannot have a greater charge than the cell
and vice versa. Having a cell cap provides a modified electric field above the
cell that otherwise would not be present. As unit charge increases, the field
becomes more and more intense.

I am still checking the importance of distance between the cell and its cap.
Basically any metal in proximity to the cell's top area and in contact with the
cell can increase unit charge. In other words the cap can be mounted to the side
of the cell and still get results; though not as great as a top mounted cap.

Thanks,
James

Hello DK,

Welcome to our group. Go to the files section first, it contains information on
getting started with Joe cells.

Thanks,
James Goss

Guys new production with how to make tutorial for you, down load and save.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n87tZdFASaM

Black salve is now banned from sale in Australia and this ban may spread to
other countries. If this was not enough, any black salve DVD documentaries
showing others successful results are also being targeted and prevented from
sale. Open source has secured many things in the public domain. This method is
the non profit organizations heart and soul. Now others' black salve success
testimonies and the method to produce this successful alternative cancer
treatment is released into the public domain - DVD style and with step by step
tutorials and background.

Panacea has re produced our educational video entitled the "Panacea Black Salve
Production" to help public education of alternative cancer treatments. This
production features Panacea volunteers who obtained medical proof of this
alternative cancer treatment working. This treatment like many others has a long
history of neglect. This production also outlines the details needed for the
creation of facilities or alternative cancer treatment research clinic for
further security, support and public education. We have many more alternative
cancer treatments (http://www.panacea-bocaf.org/alternativecancertreatments.htm)
like the Gerson therapy, Macrobiotic, and Budwig diet which critically need
public education and security from suppression. All of these treatments
including black salve are non toxic and have statistical efficacy over the
standard chemo, surgery and radiation, but remain unknown to capacity. There is
no security to ensure that doctors provide the public with informed consent of
these treatments and of their successfully statistics. Nor do they have any
security against vested interests. There are many conflicts of interests with
this health education in what is now a multibillion dollar pharmaceutical
industry.

Presently, black salve is banned from sale by the TGA in Australia. To help
gather further medical proof and educate the public, Panacea has created the
Black Salve Facebook site (https://www.facebook.com/blacksalve). Alternative
treatments to Cancer, Black Salve information, and real case information will be
posted here. If you have used Black Salve, please use this page to post your
story to share with others. Also Panacea has created a new Panacea medical
research site to help gather medical records of black salve working in human
subjects and educate the world. http://www.blacksalve.org.au

Ash on behalf of the trustee's of Panacea-BOCAF

These are hard questions, and I'm sure they don't have an answer, but I'll ask
anyway! I've been researching the Joe cell at least 4 years, but have never made
any sense out of the following concepts:

1.) Do you need to cook the water? If so, how long, and does it need to turn
golden brown? Alex Schiffer says no, absolutely not necessary. But Joe obviously
said it was a requirement in his videos, and said the car runs off the "charged"
water.

2.) Is a blind plug operation suitable or is a vacuum port better?

[What about a combination like Steven Jones did, who was experimenting with a
very high quality machined Joe cell before disappearing completely (probably
threatened. It would seem after watching the Byron free energy video that the
energy does not need to travel in the open air, it travels through solid
aluminum very easily and even has an affinity for aluminum? Link to Steven Jones
videos : http://youtu.be/moszbWASaMM ] ]

3.) What about the 3 types of alignments of "water alignments" that produce 3
types of gas. Joe said in his video you need the water in the correct alignment,
before putting it in your car cell.

[I've experimented with pulsed DC on a plate cell, and I've only got the stage 3
gas, the kind that has no flame, and sounds like a stick of dynamite. I've tried
at least 4 different plate cells, with well water, all give me the detonating,
violent, implosive clear flame bubbles, no matter how much I turn the cell on
and off. I've never used anything but pulsed DC, well water, no chemicals for
these tests. The bubbles appear instantly too, in minutes. When the stainless
steel "goes bad" and gets oxidized after many days of electrolysis, the bubbles
disappear and won't form, as there is no surface tension. Here is a video I made
of lighting bubbles straight from well water that has only been running for a
few minutes: http://youtu.be/RbIyKUEkEhQ ]

3.) The final question. Should you use electrolyte, or high voltage? What kind
of electrolyte? I've always used high voltage on my plate cells, in experiments.
In my experiments, well water turns foamy using 60 volts to 140 volts DC, but I
have noticed that after a cell heats up, it goes bad, and won't produce foam, or
charged bubbles on the surface. Can a Joe cell be charged using high voltage, or
should I use electrolyte and trickle charge it?

This is interesting. I am curious. Sorry if I am stating the obvious, but isn't
a cap required on a Joe cell for it to function as intended? So does your
experiment prove that a sealed/partially enclosed metal container has a field
amplification effect? Perhaps this is why Joe said that PVC doesn't work for
running a car because it produces explosive gas, not implosive energy - it must
be missing the field effect.

--- In joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com, "jgosscacc1" <jgosscacc@...>
wrote:
>
> Hello Tony,
>
> The top cap supports, which hold the cap in place, originate in the cell water
and extend upward. This means the cell and cap will always have the same charge
value at any given time. Both the cell and its cap become a common unit of
single point positive charge. The cap cannot have a greater charge than the cell
and vice versa. Having a cell cap provides a modified electric field above the
cell that otherwise would not be present. As unit charge increases, the field
becomes more and more intense.
>
> I am still checking the importance of distance between the cell and its cap.
Basically any metal in proximity to the cell's top area and in contact with the
cell can increase unit charge. In other words the cap can be mounted to the side
of the cell and still get results; though not as great as a top mounted cap.
>
> Thanks,
> James
>

-----Original Message-----
From: joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com [mailto:joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of ritalie_racing
Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2012 7:09 AM
To: joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Joe Cell Free Energy Device] Various questions

These are hard questions, and I'm sure they don't have an answer, but I'll ask anyway! I've been researching the Joe cell at least 4 years, but have never made any sense out of the following concepts:

1.) Do you need to cook the water? If so, how long, and does it need to turn golden brown? Alex Schiffer says no, absolutely not necessary. But Joe obviously said it was a requirement in his videos, and said the car runs off the "charged" water.

You don't want to cook the water. What you want to do to prepare the water is perform a low level electrolysis to oxidize impurities out of the water so they can be filtered off. I use a flat place cell for this with 1/8" plate spacing. Apply enough current to produce gas without heating the water significantly. Once this is set up I just let it run overnight, and in the morning there's a lot of rust in the water to filter off. I'm sure there are other impurities in the same state, but the iron is the obvious one. After this the water is ready to use in the Joe cell. If the water is heated excessively, it'll never work in a cell.

2.) Is a blind plug operation suitable or is a vacuum port better?

The engine will respond to the cell quicker with a vacuum connection, but the cell also gets contaminated faster from the fuel vapors that work their way back into it. This can be minimized by placing a plug in the transfer tube with a very tiny hole in it.(1/64” ?).

I looked at Jones website, and don’t remember seeing any claims of fuelless operation. Got the sense that he was simply trying to move product. The cells did look nice!

[What about a combination like Steven Jones did, who was experimenting with a very high quality machined Joe cell before disappearing completely (probably threatened. It would seem after watching the Byron free energy video that the energy does not need to travel in the open air, it travels through solid aluminum very easily and even has an affinity for aluminum? Link to Steven Jones videos : http://youtu.be/moszbWASaMM ] ]

An alternative connection that makes sense to me is to use an oil probe as suggested by Robert Hull. Just run a wire from the inside top of the cell canister or top to the probe. Keep the wire as far away from the high voltage ignition wires as possible. I think the goal is to charge up either the oil or water which will than induce an opposite charge in the other liquid. I don’t think that (in theory) it matters which liquid is initially charged up, but antifreeze tends to limit how much the water can be charged up. Some oil additives have a similar effect, so it’s best to use generic oil without additives.

3.) What about the 3 types of alignments of "water alignments" that produce 3 types of gas. Joe said in his video you need the water in the correct alignment, before putting it in your car cell.

Each tine power is applied to a cell it comes up in one of 3 different modes. Once everything is set up the sequence is to apply power for about 10 seconds, remove it for 10 seconds, repeat those steps a second time, than attach it permanently. Three taps! This should put the cell into the proper state. 

[I've experimented with pulsed DC on a plate cell, and I've only got the stage 3 gas, the kind that has no flame, and sounds like a stick of dynamite. I've tried at least 4 different plate cells, with well water, all give me the detonating, violent, implosive clear flame bubbles, no matter how much I turn the cell on and off. I've never used anything but pulsed DC, well water, no chemicals for these tests. The bubbles appear instantly too, in minutes. When the stainless steel "goes bad" and gets oxidized after many days of electrolysis, the bubbles disappear and won't form, as there is no surface tension. Here is a video I made of lighting bubbles straight from well water that has only been running for a few minutes: http://youtu.be/RbIyKUEkEhQ ]

3.) The final question. Should you use electrolyte, or high voltage? What kind of electrolyte? I've always used high voltage on my plate cells, in experiments. In my experiments, well water turns foamy using 60 volts to 140 volts DC, but I have noticed that after a cell heats up, it goes bad, and won't produce foam, or charged bubbles on the surface. Can a Joe cell be charged using high voltage, or should I use electrolyte and trickle charge it?

No electrolyte! The goal is to clean up the water, not contaminate it. Never overheat it, it kills the water! A working cell does not need to produce bubbles at all. Even 12 volts across a cell is too much. A more proper cell voltage is around 8.5 volts. A 9 volt battery is a fair compromise! The water needs to have a neutral ph – 7.0. Alex uses electrolyte in his cells so that they’ll produce some bubbles that he uses to evaluate the cell state. But he uses a carefully selected combination of alkaline and acidic electrolytes (go juice!) to maintain the ph at 7.0. This is unnecessary, but he has had some successes using that approach.

Much of what I’m saying here is covered in documents related to the Joe cell that are available on:

http://resonantfractals.org/Magnetism/index.htm

We’re looking into a somewhat different approach to the JC tech here:

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/vibrational_combustion_technology/

Interesting reading!

Bernie

------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/joecellfreeenergydevice/

<*> Your email settings:

    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/joecellfreeenergydevice/join

    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:

    joecellfreeenergydevice-digest@yahoogroups.com

    joecellfreeenergydevice-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

    joecellfreeenergydevice-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

-----

No virus found in this message.

Checked by AVG - www.avg.com

Version: 2012.0.2178 / Virus Database: 2425/5034 - Release Date: 05/30/12

Wow, thanks for the fast reply. All good information. :)

I am going to raise some more questions, but only because I am a very curious
person, not because I mean any disrespect.

Regarding the water alignment. How do I know that if I tap the power 3 times,
that I will be in the correct mode on the 3rd tap? What if my water has 0.75
volts resting, and I hook up power 2 times, and then a 3rd and final time.  My
question is, should I short out the cell first, to bring it back to the
"baseline" alignment?

I remember Joe said that you need to know what the previous state is, to know
what the next water state will be when the power is applied. Can you clarify?

Does this also apply to "pulsed DC" at 60hz, as I've never seen 3 types of
gases, only one type, all stage 3 gases no matter how much I try to get other
gases. Are the gases NOT a good indicator of the alignment of the water?

Is it possible that electrolyte is what creates these 2 useless alternative
potential alignments of the water, and the corresponding impure gases that
explode with a yellow flame?

One final question. Could I make a Joe cell using a stainless steel cooking
kettle? Or is this too short, and too wide?


--- In joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com, "Bernie Heere"
<bernie.heere@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of ritalie_racing
> Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2012 7:09 AM
> To: joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Joe Cell Free Energy Device] Various questions
>
> These are hard questions, and I'm sure they don't have an answer, but I'll
> ask anyway! I've been researching the Joe cell at least 4 years, but have
> never made any sense out of the following concepts:
>
> 1.) Do you need to cook the water? If so, how long, and does it need to turn
> golden brown? Alex Schiffer says no, absolutely not necessary. But Joe
> obviously said it was a requirement in his videos, and said the car runs off
> the "charged" water.
>
> You don't want to cook the water. What you want to do to prepare the water
> is perform a low level electrolysis to oxidize impurities out of the water
> so they can be filtered off. I use a flat place cell for this with 1/8"
> plate spacing. Apply enough current to produce gas without heating the water
> significantly. Once this is set up I just let it run overnight, and in the
> morning there's a lot of rust in the water to filter off. I'm sure there are
> other impurities in the same state, but the iron is the obvious one. After
> this the water is ready to use in the Joe cell. If the water is heated
> excessively, it'll never work in a cell.
>
> 2.) Is a blind plug operation suitable or is a vacuum port better?
>
> The engine will respond to the cell quicker with a vacuum connection, but
> the cell also gets contaminated faster from the fuel vapors that work their
> way back into it. This can be minimized by placing a plug in the transfer
> tube with a very tiny hole in it.(1/64" ?).
>
> I looked at Jones website, and don't remember seeing any claims of fuelless
> operation. Got the sense that he was simply trying to move product. The
> cells did look nice!
>
> [What about a combination like Steven Jones did, who was experimenting with
> a very high quality machined Joe cell before disappearing completely
> (probably threatened. It would seem after watching the Byron free energy
> video that the energy does not need to travel in the open air, it travels
> through solid aluminum very easily and even has an affinity for aluminum?
> Link to Steven Jones videos : http://youtu.be/moszbWASaMM ] ]
>
> An alternative connection that makes sense to me is to use an oil probe as
> suggested by Robert Hull. Just run a wire from the inside top of the cell
> canister or top to the probe. Keep the wire as far away from the high
> voltage ignition wires as possible. I think the goal is to charge up either
> the oil or water which will than induce an opposite charge in the other
> liquid. I don't think that (in theory) it matters which liquid is initially
> charged up, but antifreeze tends to limit how much the water can be charged
> up. Some oil additives have a similar effect, so it's best to use generic
> oil without additives.
>
> 3.) What about the 3 types of alignments of "water alignments" that produce
> 3 types of gas. Joe said in his video you need the water in the correct
> alignment, before putting it in your car cell.
>
> Each tine power is applied to a cell it comes up in one of 3 different
> modes. Once everything is set up the sequence is to apply power for about 10
> seconds, remove it for 10 seconds, repeat those steps a second time, than
> attach it permanently. Three taps! This should put the cell into the proper
> state.
>
> [I've experimented with pulsed DC on a plate cell, and I've only got the
> stage 3 gas, the kind that has no flame, and sounds like a stick of
> dynamite. I've tried at least 4 different plate cells, with well water, all
> give me the detonating, violent, implosive clear flame bubbles, no matter
> how much I turn the cell on and off. I've never used anything but pulsed DC,
> well water, no chemicals for these tests. The bubbles appear instantly too,
> in minutes. When the stainless steel "goes bad" and gets oxidized after many
> days of electrolysis, the bubbles disappear and won't form, as there is no
> surface tension. Here is a video I made of lighting bubbles straight from
> well water that has only been running for a few minutes:
> http://youtu.be/RbIyKUEkEhQ ]
>
> 3.) The final question. Should you use electrolyte, or high voltage? What
> kind of electrolyte? I've always used high voltage on my plate cells, in
> experiments. In my experiments, well water turns foamy using 60 volts to 140
> volts DC, but I have noticed that after a cell heats up, it goes bad, and
> won't produce foam, or charged bubbles on the surface. Can a Joe cell be
> charged using high voltage, or should I use electrolyte and trickle charge
> it?
>
> No electrolyte! The goal is to clean up the water, not contaminate it. Never
> overheat it, it kills the water! A working cell does not need to produce
> bubbles at all. Even 12 volts across a cell is too much. A more proper cell
> voltage is around 8.5 volts. A 9 volt battery is a fair compromise! The
> water needs to have a neutral ph - 7.0. Alex uses electrolyte in his cells
> so that they'll produce some bubbles that he uses to evaluate the cell
> state. But he uses a carefully selected combination of alkaline and acidic
> electrolytes (go juice!) to maintain the ph at 7.0. This is unnecessary, but
> he has had some successes using that approach.
>
> Much of what I'm saying here is covered in documents related to the Joe cell
> that are available on:
>
> http://resonantfractals.org/Magnetism/index.htm
>
> We're looking into a somewhat different approach to the JC tech here:
>
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/vibrational_combustion_technology/
>
>
> Interesting reading!
>
> Bernie
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.2178 / Virus Database: 2425/5034 - Release Date: 05/30/12
>

-----Original Message-----
From: joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com [mailto:joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of ritalie_racing
Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2012 2:09 PM
To: joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Joe Cell Free Energy Device] Re: Various questions

Wow, thanks for the fast reply. All good information. :)

I am going to raise some more questions, but only because I am a very curious person, not because I mean any disrespect.

Regarding the water alignment. How do I know that if I tap the power 3 times, that I will be in the correct mode on the 3rd tap? What if my water has 0.75 volts resting, and I hook up power 2 times, and then a 3rd and final time.  My question is, should I short out the cell first, to bring it back to the "baseline" alignment?

I don't think that shorting the cell will set a baseline. More likely leaving it unpowered overnight will!

I remember Joe said that you need to know what the previous state is, to know what the next water state will be when the power is applied. Can you clarify?

What you really need to do is learn to sense the energy. Try doing this with your face directly over the cell and see if you can feel any difference. The face and particularly the lips very sensitive to the energy.

Does this also apply to "pulsed DC" at 60hz, as I've never seen 3 types of gases, only one type, all stage 3 gases no matter how much I try to get other gases. Are the gases NOT a good indicator of the alignment of the water?

I wouldn't try to use pulsed energy on an operational cell. I sometime use it to bring up a cell the first time. I use a simple 555 pulser running at 5 Hz, but I run the output through a diode to prevent the voltage from being drawn down. So it winds up being pulsed between 2 volts and about 7 volts.

Is it possible that electrolyte is what creates these 2 useless alternative potential alignments of the water, and the corresponding impure gases that explode with a yellow flame?

These states are not necessarily useless except in terms of boosting an engine. They have to do with molecular alignment and orientation between molecules and the spin states of the atoms. Once again, do NOT use ANY electrolyte. It's counter-productive, and so is generating bubbles.

One final question. Could I make a Joe cell using a stainless steel cooking kettle? Or is this too short, and too wide?

To do it right, all the parts in a cell should be 316L ss. Properly selected 304 will work to some extent, but will eventually crud up the water to where it stops working. If your goal is fuelless operation, than by all means invest in the 316 for everything. If you're after a simple mileage boosting setup you can get by with less expensive SS. I've built a couple of them in SS canisters that I got at Wal-mart for about $8.

Bernie

--- In joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com, "Bernie Heere" <bernie.heere@...> wrote:

>

>

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com

> [mailto:joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of

> ritalie_racing

> Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2012 7:09 AM

> To: joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com

> Subject: [Joe Cell Free Energy Device] Various questions

>

> These are hard questions, and I'm sure they don't have an answer, but

> I'll ask anyway! I've been researching the Joe cell at least 4 years,

> but have never made any sense out of the following concepts:

>

> 1.) Do you need to cook the water? If so, how long, and does it need

> to turn golden brown? Alex Schiffer says no, absolutely not necessary.

> But Joe obviously said it was a requirement in his videos, and said

> the car runs off the "charged" water.

>

> You don't want to cook the water. What you want to do to prepare the

> water is perform a low level electrolysis to oxidize impurities out of

> the water so they can be filtered off. I use a flat place cell for this with 1/8"

> plate spacing. Apply enough current to produce gas without heating the

> water significantly. Once this is set up I just let it run overnight,

> and in the morning there's a lot of rust in the water to filter off.

> I'm sure there are other impurities in the same state, but the iron is

> the obvious one. After this the water is ready to use in the Joe cell.

> If the water is heated excessively, it'll never work in a cell.

>

> 2.) Is a blind plug operation suitable or is a vacuum port better?

>

> The engine will respond to the cell quicker with a vacuum connection,

> but the cell also gets contaminated faster from the fuel vapors that

> work their way back into it. This can be minimized by placing a plug

> in the transfer tube with a very tiny hole in it.(1/64" ?).

>

> I looked at Jones website, and don't remember seeing any claims of

> fuelless operation. Got the sense that he was simply trying to move

> product. The cells did look nice!

>

> [What about a combination like Steven Jones did, who was experimenting

> with a very high quality machined Joe cell before disappearing

> completely (probably threatened. It would seem after watching the

> Byron free energy video that the energy does not need to travel in the

> open air, it travels through solid aluminum very easily and even has an affinity for aluminum?

> Link to Steven Jones videos : http://youtu.be/moszbWASaMM ] ]

>

> An alternative connection that makes sense to me is to use an oil

> probe as suggested by Robert Hull. Just run a wire from the inside top

> of the cell canister or top to the probe. Keep the wire as far away

> from the high voltage ignition wires as possible. I think the goal is

> to charge up either the oil or water which will than induce an

> opposite charge in the other liquid. I don't think that (in theory) it

> matters which liquid is initially charged up, but antifreeze tends to

> limit how much the water can be charged up. Some oil additives have a

> similar effect, so it's best to use generic oil without additives.

>

> 3.) What about the 3 types of alignments of "water alignments" that

> produce

> 3 types of gas. Joe said in his video you need the water in the

> correct alignment, before putting it in your car cell.

>

> Each tine power is applied to a cell it comes up in one of 3 different

> modes. Once everything is set up the sequence is to apply power for

> about 10 seconds, remove it for 10 seconds, repeat those steps a

> second time, than attach it permanently. Three taps! This should put

> the cell into the proper state.

>

> [I've experimented with pulsed DC on a plate cell, and I've only got

> the stage 3 gas, the kind that has no flame, and sounds like a stick

> of dynamite. I've tried at least 4 different plate cells, with well

> water, all give me the detonating, violent, implosive clear flame

> bubbles, no matter how much I turn the cell on and off. I've never

> used anything but pulsed DC, well water, no chemicals for these tests.

> The bubbles appear instantly too, in minutes. When the stainless steel

> "goes bad" and gets oxidized after many days of electrolysis, the

> bubbles disappear and won't form, as there is no surface tension. Here

> is a video I made of lighting bubbles straight from well water that has only been running for a few minutes:

> http://youtu.be/RbIyKUEkEhQ ]

>

> 3.) The final question. Should you use electrolyte, or high voltage?

> What kind of electrolyte? I've always used high voltage on my plate

> cells, in experiments. In my experiments, well water turns foamy using

> 60 volts to 140 volts DC, but I have noticed that after a cell heats

> up, it goes bad, and won't produce foam, or charged bubbles on the

> surface. Can a Joe cell be charged using high voltage, or should I use

> electrolyte and trickle charge it?

>

> No electrolyte! The goal is to clean up the water, not contaminate it.

> Never overheat it, it kills the water! A working cell does not need to

> produce bubbles at all. Even 12 volts across a cell is too much. A

> more proper cell voltage is around 8.5 volts. A 9 volt battery is a

> fair compromise! The water needs to have a neutral ph - 7.0. Alex uses

> electrolyte in his cells so that they'll produce some bubbles that he

> uses to evaluate the cell state. But he uses a carefully selected

> combination of alkaline and acidic electrolytes (go juice!) to

> maintain the ph at 7.0. This is unnecessary, but he has had some successes using that approach.

>

> Much of what I'm saying here is covered in documents related to the

> Joe cell that are available on:

>

> http://resonantfractals.org/Magnetism/index.htm

>

> We're looking into a somewhat different approach to the JC tech here:

>

> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/vibrational_combustion_technology/

>

>

> Interesting reading!

>

> Bernie

>

>

>

>  

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> ------------------------------------

>

> Yahoo! Groups Links

>

>

>

> -----

> No virus found in this message.

> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com

> Version: 2012.0.2178 / Virus Database: 2425/5034 - Release Date:

> 05/30/12

>

------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/joecellfreeenergydevice/

<*> Your email settings:

    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/joecellfreeenergydevice/join

    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:

    joecellfreeenergydevice-digest@yahoogroups.com

    joecellfreeenergydevice-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

    joecellfreeenergydevice-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

-----

No virus found in this message.

Checked by AVG - www.avg.com

Version: 2012.0.2178 / Virus Database: 2425/5036 - Release Date: 05/31/12

Good Questions,

Have you been working mainly with flat plate electrolizers, or do you
have a concentric tube set up like a Joe Cell uses?

Your questions have several answers depending on what you are trying to
accomplish with the cell.

If you study about Browns gas, there is a magic voltage per cell water
gap. If you stay below this voltage the water will electrolize and yet
remain cooler, the H gas given off will take up twice the volume of H2
gas, and the implosive energy will be maintained.

If you apply higher voltages to electrolize, the water will go hot, the
gas given off will be H2 and O2, and this gas will not have anywhere the
same energy or power to shake the room and make you go deaf for an hour
after it goes off.

The Joe Cell uses the browns gas type energy I believe, but stores it in
the concentric geometry of the system, and causes the water tension to
change, setting up an inflow or compressive type of active vibrational
energy.

It relies on storage of the high energy gas permiating the water and SS,
to build this gravity warping field effect.

As you apply voltage to a cell then from inner tube to outer can, there
are many concerns if this is the goal.
In a concentric ring tube set up like the Joe Cell, this compressive
energy will become one coherent field the size of the can. This cannot
happen in a flat tube cell, and the energy of that gas is no where near
the same implosive power as your pops indicate, you are not shaking the
building or going deaf in the ears for an hour after lighting those off
are you?

One of the side effects of having this sort of charge in a Joe Cell is
reduced vehicle inertia. Noteable when you go driving, and around
corners. Accelerations are very much faster also, it's like being in a
race car.

Back to applying the voltage. When you apply the voltage the water goes
into an absorption and alignment mode, then when you remove the voltage
the water goes into a self sustaining mode and maintains the voltage on
the tubes. This effect happen right on the boundary where the water
meets the tubes, and the tubes only need to remain wet for the voltage
to persist. If this voltage slowly bleeds away, then the cell has a
problem of some kind. A well made cell can hold a small voltage forever
if it is self sustaining vibrationally. This only happens on the third
tap of voltage to the cell using DC to bring the cell up. The other two
taps will not self sustain as near as I can tell, they always bleed off.

Most cells will slowly discharge over time, but I have now created some
cells that never discharge over time after the initial charging. I had
one up for several months, the water goes perfectly clean in this mode,
and the voltage remains present, but redistributes for a greater voltage
on the outer water gaps and less voltage on the inner gaps.

I would not expect any flat cell electrolizer to operate in this
fashion.

Voltage is pushed outwards, and vibrational energy is compressed inwards
to the center tube. Where the vibrational velocity of the cell
approaches light velocities there is a warping of the space time field,
and the cell becomes something very different then we are used to
dealing with as electronics people.

The cell is then used to condition the engine and car frame to change
the laws of inertia, and many of us can feel the vibrational coupling
between the cells and the metals of the car.

Dave L

--- In joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com, "ritalie_racing"
<ritalie_racing@...> wrote:
>
> These are hard questions, and I'm sure they don't have an answer, but
I'll ask anyway! I've been researching the Joe cell at least 4 years,
but have never made any sense out of the following concepts:
>
> 1.) Do you need to cook the water? If so, how long, and does it need
to turn golden brown? Alex Schiffer says no, absolutely not necessary.
But Joe obviously said it was a requirement in his videos, and said the
car runs off the "charged" water.
>
> 2.) Is a blind plug operation suitable or is a vacuum port better?
>
> [What about a combination like Steven Jones did, who was experimenting
with a very high quality machined Joe cell before disappearing
completely (probably threatened. It would seem after watching the Byron
free energy video that the energy does not need to travel in the open
air, it travels through solid aluminum very easily and even has an
affinity for aluminum? Link to Steven Jones videos :
http://youtu.be/moszbWASaMM ] ]
>
> 3.) What about the 3 types of alignments of "water alignments" that
produce 3 types of gas. Joe said in his video you need the water in the
correct alignment, before putting it in your car cell.
>
> [I've experimented with pulsed DC on a plate cell, and I've only got
the stage 3 gas, the kind that has no flame, and sounds like a stick of
dynamite. I've tried at least 4 different plate cells, with well water,
all give me the detonating, violent, implosive clear flame bubbles, no
matter how much I turn the cell on and off. I've never used anything but
pulsed DC, well water, no chemicals for these tests. The bubbles appear
instantly too, in minutes. When the stainless steel "goes bad" and gets
oxidized after many days of electrolysis, the bubbles disappear and
won't form, as there is no surface tension. Here is a video I made of
lighting bubbles straight from well water that has only been running for
a few minutes: http://youtu.be/RbIyKUEkEhQ ]
>
> 3.) The final question. Should you use electrolyte, or high voltage?
What kind of electrolyte? I've always used high voltage on my plate
cells, in experiments. In my experiments, well water turns foamy using
60 volts to 140 volts DC, but I have noticed that after a cell heats up,
it goes bad, and won't produce foam, or charged bubbles on the surface.
Can a Joe cell be charged using high voltage, or should I use
electrolyte and trickle charge it?
>

Very good info. Thanks!

I know the heat you are talking about. I had an electrolysis cell that was
running for hours. I let it cool down for a couple hours. When I took it apart,
it was hot. It scared me because I felt heat radiating off of it, it was very
warm. I thought the plates were hot but when I touched the metal and the water I
had poured out of it, both were cool to the touch, certainly close to ambient
temperature, not hot at all. I noticed the empty cell with damp plates had heat
radiating from the metal, and you are right, you can feel it against your face
very easily. I've yet to ever feel this effect again with any water!

1.) Does the water alignment "state 3" produce warmth on your hands and face,
simply by being in this state? So if I were to switch to a different state would
this heat be less noticeable, and if so, how long between state changes until
the heat energy difference can be detected?


--- In joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com, "Bernie Heere"
<bernie.heere@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of ritalie_racing
> Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2012 2:09 PM
> To: joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Joe Cell Free Energy Device] Re: Various questions
>
> Wow, thanks for the fast reply. All good information. :)
>
> I am going to raise some more questions, but only because I am a very
> curious person, not because I mean any disrespect.
>
> Regarding the water alignment. How do I know that if I tap the power 3
> times, that I will be in the correct mode on the 3rd tap? What if my water
> has 0.75 volts resting, and I hook up power 2 times, and then a 3rd and
> final time.  My question is, should I short out the cell first, to bring it
> back to the "baseline" alignment?
>
> I don't think that shorting the cell will set a baseline. More likely
> leaving it unpowered overnight will!
>
> I remember Joe said that you need to know what the previous state is, to
> know what the next water state will be when the power is applied. Can you
> clarify?
>
> What you really need to do is learn to sense the energy. Try doing this with
> your face directly over the cell and see if you can feel any difference. The
> face and particularly the lips very sensitive to the energy.
>
> Does this also apply to "pulsed DC" at 60hz, as I've never seen 3 types of
> gases, only one type, all stage 3 gases no matter how much I try to get
> other gases. Are the gases NOT a good indicator of the alignment of the
> water?
>
> I wouldn't try to use pulsed energy on an operational cell. I sometime use
> it to bring up a cell the first time. I use a simple 555 pulser running at 5
> Hz, but I run the output through a diode to prevent the voltage from being
> drawn down. So it winds up being pulsed between 2 volts and about 7 volts.
>
> Is it possible that electrolyte is what creates these 2 useless alternative
> potential alignments of the water, and the corresponding impure gases that
> explode with a yellow flame?
>
> These states are not necessarily useless except in terms of boosting an
> engine. They have to do with molecular alignment and orientation between
> molecules and the spin states of the atoms. Once again, do NOT use ANY
> electrolyte. It's counter-productive, and so is generating bubbles.
>
> One final question. Could I make a Joe cell using a stainless steel cooking
> kettle? Or is this too short, and too wide?
>
> To do it right, all the parts in a cell should be 316L ss. Properly selected
> 304 will work to some extent, but will eventually crud up the water to where
> it stops working. If your goal is fuelless operation, than by all means
> invest in the 316 for everything. If you're after a simple mileage boosting
> setup you can get by with less expensive SS. I've built a couple of them in
> SS canisters that I got at Wal-mart for about $8.
>
> Bernie
>
>
>
> --- In joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com, "Bernie Heere"
> <bernie.heere@> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com
> > [mailto:joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
> > ritalie_racing
> > Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2012 7:09 AM
> > To: joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [Joe Cell Free Energy Device] Various questions
> >
> > These are hard questions, and I'm sure they don't have an answer, but
> > I'll ask anyway! I've been researching the Joe cell at least 4 years,
> > but have never made any sense out of the following concepts:
> >
> > 1.) Do you need to cook the water? If so, how long, and does it need
> > to turn golden brown? Alex Schiffer says no, absolutely not necessary.
> > But Joe obviously said it was a requirement in his videos, and said
> > the car runs off the "charged" water.
> >
> > You don't want to cook the water. What you want to do to prepare the
> > water is perform a low level electrolysis to oxidize impurities out of
> > the water so they can be filtered off. I use a flat place cell for this
> with 1/8"
> > plate spacing. Apply enough current to produce gas without heating the
> > water significantly. Once this is set up I just let it run overnight,
> > and in the morning there's a lot of rust in the water to filter off.
> > I'm sure there are other impurities in the same state, but the iron is
> > the obvious one. After this the water is ready to use in the Joe cell.
> > If the water is heated excessively, it'll never work in a cell.
> >
> > 2.) Is a blind plug operation suitable or is a vacuum port better?
> >
> > The engine will respond to the cell quicker with a vacuum connection,
> > but the cell also gets contaminated faster from the fuel vapors that
> > work their way back into it. This can be minimized by placing a plug
> > in the transfer tube with a very tiny hole in it.(1/64" ?).
> >
> > I looked at Jones website, and don't remember seeing any claims of
> > fuelless operation. Got the sense that he was simply trying to move
> > product. The cells did look nice!
> >
> > [What about a combination like Steven Jones did, who was experimenting
> > with a very high quality machined Joe cell before disappearing
> > completely (probably threatened. It would seem after watching the
> > Byron free energy video that the energy does not need to travel in the
> > open air, it travels through solid aluminum very easily and even has an
> affinity for aluminum?
> > Link to Steven Jones videos : http://youtu.be/moszbWASaMM ] ]
> >
> > An alternative connection that makes sense to me is to use an oil
> > probe as suggested by Robert Hull. Just run a wire from the inside top
> > of the cell canister or top to the probe. Keep the wire as far away
> > from the high voltage ignition wires as possible. I think the goal is
> > to charge up either the oil or water which will than induce an
> > opposite charge in the other liquid. I don't think that (in theory) it
> > matters which liquid is initially charged up, but antifreeze tends to
> > limit how much the water can be charged up. Some oil additives have a
> > similar effect, so it's best to use generic oil without additives.
> >
> > 3.) What about the 3 types of alignments of "water alignments" that
> > produce
> > 3 types of gas. Joe said in his video you need the water in the
> > correct alignment, before putting it in your car cell.
> >
> > Each tine power is applied to a cell it comes up in one of 3 different
> > modes. Once everything is set up the sequence is to apply power for
> > about 10 seconds, remove it for 10 seconds, repeat those steps a
> > second time, than attach it permanently. Three taps! This should put
> > the cell into the proper state.
> >
> > [I've experimented with pulsed DC on a plate cell, and I've only got
> > the stage 3 gas, the kind that has no flame, and sounds like a stick
> > of dynamite. I've tried at least 4 different plate cells, with well
> > water, all give me the detonating, violent, implosive clear flame
> > bubbles, no matter how much I turn the cell on and off. I've never
> > used anything but pulsed DC, well water, no chemicals for these tests.
> > The bubbles appear instantly too, in minutes. When the stainless steel
> > "goes bad" and gets oxidized after many days of electrolysis, the
> > bubbles disappear and won't form, as there is no surface tension. Here
> > is a video I made of lighting bubbles straight from well water that has
> only been running for a few minutes:
> > http://youtu.be/RbIyKUEkEhQ ]
> >
> > 3.) The final question. Should you use electrolyte, or high voltage?
> > What kind of electrolyte? I've always used high voltage on my plate
> > cells, in experiments. In my experiments, well water turns foamy using
> > 60 volts to 140 volts DC, but I have noticed that after a cell heats
> > up, it goes bad, and won't produce foam, or charged bubbles on the
> > surface. Can a Joe cell be charged using high voltage, or should I use
> > electrolyte and trickle charge it?
> >
> > No electrolyte! The goal is to clean up the water, not contaminate it.
> > Never overheat it, it kills the water! A working cell does not need to
> > produce bubbles at all. Even 12 volts across a cell is too much. A
> > more proper cell voltage is around 8.5 volts. A 9 volt battery is a
> > fair compromise! The water needs to have a neutral ph - 7.0. Alex uses
> > electrolyte in his cells so that they'll produce some bubbles that he
> > uses to evaluate the cell state. But he uses a carefully selected
> > combination of alkaline and acidic electrolytes (go juice!) to
> > maintain the ph at 7.0. This is unnecessary, but he has had some successes
> using that approach.
> >
> > Much of what I'm saying here is covered in documents related to the
> > Joe cell that are available on:
> >
> > http://resonantfractals.org/Magnetism/index.htm
> >
> > We're looking into a somewhat different approach to the JC tech here:
> >
> > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/vibrational_combustion_technology/
> >
> >
> > Interesting reading!
> >
> > Bernie
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> > -----
> > No virus found in this message.
> > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> > Version: 2012.0.2178 / Virus Database: 2425/5034 - Release Date:
> > 05/30/12
> >
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.2178 / Virus Database: 2425/5036 - Release Date: 05/31/12
>

Hi Dave, wow amazing explanations and information. You really see the big
picture and explain the entire scope of things, I appreciate that, as it's the
only way for people to truly "get it".

I have studied all of Joe's videos (the ones public anyway) and read all the
guides and stories. I heard that Joe installed a tiny thimble sized cell on a
dragster. While accelerating on the drag strip, the car went 4.70 seconds, a
world record at the time. There was a sonic boom, the car levitated the entire
length of the drag strip, and the vehicle made no noise, also the occupant felt
no g-forces in the cab, presumably?

Joe also said his friends truck levitated, and Joe personally said that he ran
his hand under the tires while it was off the ground.

I've not heard many other stories, but I would like to hear them.

I don't have a Joe cell, but I have an old stainless steel pressure cooker I was
thinking about trying to convert. It is slightly magnetic about 10% the
magnetism of iron. I wonder if it would work? Peter Stevens says having
non-magnetic metal is not too terribly important, but can make it harder to get
it to work?

1.) How do I do the 3 taps of power? If the cell is sitting stationary, with
0.450 volts, which is common for ALL electrolysis cells I've built. Do I need to
draw a load, add fresh water, what? How do I know that the 3 taps will get me
where I need to be? And do I do the negative first on, last off, type method?

2.) The voltage pushes outward, but the energy in the cell pushes inward. I am
lost with this one? I am trying to understand why a Joe cell would behave
differently than a plate cell. Joe said early on that you must have a thick
walled metal vessel for running an engine, because this contains, and or
converts the energy.

3.) Does stage 3 produce constant tiny streams of bubbles for weeks at a time?

I've watched all the Joe cell videos of cells running cars. I'm of the
impression that we are dealing with a particle. None of the people say this,
everyone says it's a vibrational energy, but I believe it's a particle. Either a
particle is sucked out of the engine, or a particle is put in, but particles are
definitely drawn out. perhaps it is as simple as having H+ ions, which are just
protons, pulling electrons out of the engine, making the engine positively
charged? How about the Robert Hull effect of simply putting a positive charge in
the oil, isn't this just sucking electrons out of the oil, slowly? What about
Joe's claim that his cells suck the electrons out of the metal in the block? I
can't see how we are attributing all these things to a spinning vortex of energy
that is very large and wide?

However, maybe this vortex of energy (only found in a cylinder shaped Joe cell)
causes a cell to "breed" and stay charged, which is a separate but beneficial
effect from the charged particles which run an engine.

I am absolutely open minded, just raising questions for the sake of
conversation. :)









--- In joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com, "David Lowrance"
<libra_spirit@...> wrote:
>
>
> Good Questions,
>
> Have you been working mainly with flat plate electrolizers, or do you
> have a concentric tube set up like a Joe Cell uses?
>
> Your questions have several answers depending on what you are trying to
> accomplish with the cell.
>
> If you study about Browns gas, there is a magic voltage per cell water
> gap. If you stay below this voltage the water will electrolize and yet
> remain cooler, the H gas given off will take up twice the volume of H2
> gas, and the implosive energy will be maintained.
>
> If you apply higher voltages to electrolize, the water will go hot, the
> gas given off will be H2 and O2, and this gas will not have anywhere the
> same energy or power to shake the room and make you go deaf for an hour
> after it goes off.
>
> The Joe Cell uses the browns gas type energy I believe, but stores it in
> the concentric geometry of the system, and causes the water tension to
> change, setting up an inflow or compressive type of active vibrational
> energy.
>
> It relies on storage of the high energy gas permiating the water and SS,
> to build this gravity warping field effect.
>
> As you apply voltage to a cell then from inner tube to outer can, there
> are many concerns if this is the goal.
> In a concentric ring tube set up like the Joe Cell, this compressive
> energy will become one coherent field the size of the can. This cannot
> happen in a flat tube cell, and the energy of that gas is no where near
> the same implosive power as your pops indicate, you are not shaking the
> building or going deaf in the ears for an hour after lighting those off
> are you?
>
> One of the side effects of having this sort of charge in a Joe Cell is
> reduced vehicle inertia. Noteable when you go driving, and around
> corners. Accelerations are very much faster also, it's like being in a
> race car.
>
> Back to applying the voltage. When you apply the voltage the water goes
> into an absorption and alignment mode, then when you remove the voltage
> the water goes into a self sustaining mode and maintains the voltage on
> the tubes. This effect happen right on the boundary where the water
> meets the tubes, and the tubes only need to remain wet for the voltage
> to persist. If this voltage slowly bleeds away, then the cell has a
> problem of some kind. A well made cell can hold a small voltage forever
> if it is self sustaining vibrationally. This only happens on the third
> tap of voltage to the cell using DC to bring the cell up. The other two
> taps will not self sustain as near as I can tell, they always bleed off.
>
> Most cells will slowly discharge over time, but I have now created some
> cells that never discharge over time after the initial charging. I had
> one up for several months, the water goes perfectly clean in this mode,
> and the voltage remains present, but redistributes for a greater voltage
> on the outer water gaps and less voltage on the inner gaps.
>
> I would not expect any flat cell electrolizer to operate in this
> fashion.
>
> Voltage is pushed outwards, and vibrational energy is compressed inwards
> to the center tube. Where the vibrational velocity of the cell
> approaches light velocities there is a warping of the space time field,
> and the cell becomes something very different then we are used to
> dealing with as electronics people.
>
> The cell is then used to condition the engine and car frame to change
> the laws of inertia, and many of us can feel the vibrational coupling
> between the cells and the metals of the car.
>
> Dave L
>
> --- In joecellfreeenergydevice@yahoogroups.com, "ritalie_racing"
> <ritalie_racing@> wrote:
> >
> > These are hard questions, and I'm sure they don't have an answer, but
> I'll ask anyway! I've been researching the Joe cell at least 4 years,
> but have never made any sense out of the following concepts:
> >
> > 1.) Do you need to cook the water? If so, how long, and does it need
> to turn golden brown? Alex Schiffer says no, absolutely not necessary.
> But Joe obviously said it was a requirement in his videos, and said the
> car runs off the "charged" water.
> >
> > 2.) Is a blind plug operation suitable or is a vacuum port better?
> >
> > [What about a combination like Steven Jones did, who was experimenting
> with a very high quality machined Joe cell before disappearing
> completely (probably threatened. It would seem after watching the Byron
> free energy video that the energy does not need to travel in the open
> air, it travels through solid aluminum very easily and even has an
> affinity for aluminum? Link to Steven Jones videos :
> http://youtu.be/moszbWASaMM ] ]
> >
> > 3.) What about the 3 types of alignments of "water alignments" that
> produce 3 types of gas. Joe said in his video you need the water in the
> correct alignment, before putting it in your car cell.
> >
> > [I've experimented with pulsed DC on a plate cell, and I've only got
> the stage 3 gas, the kind that has no flame, and sounds like a stick of
> dynamite. I've tried at least 4 different plate cells, with well water,
> all give me the detonating, violent, implosive clear flame bubbles, no
> matter how much I turn the cell on and off. I've never used anything but
> pulsed DC, well water, no chemicals for these tests. The bubbles appear
> instantly too, in minutes. When the stainless steel "goes bad" and gets
> oxidized after many days of electrolysis, the bubbles disappear and
> won't form, as there is no surface tension. Here is a video I made of
> lighting bubbles straight from well water that has only been running for
> a few minutes: http://youtu.be/RbIyKUEkEhQ ]
> >
> > 3.) The final question. Should you use electrolyte, or high voltage?
> What kind of electrolyte? I've always used high voltage on my plate
> cells, in experiments. In my experiments, well water turns foamy using
> 60 volts to 140 volts DC, but I have noticed that after a cell heats up,
> it goes bad, and won't produce foam, or charged bubbles on the surface.
> Can a Joe cell be charged using high voltage, or should I use
> electrolyte and trickle charge it?
> >
>