Re: Stan Meyer - Autopsy Report Grimer Wed, 28 Jun 2006 13:28:54 -0700 When I was at grammar school and first learnt about water I visualised it as a lot of little molecules of H20, much like individual marbles in a big transparent bag. Later I discovered it was a tad more complicated than that. Some of the marbles had split into H+ and OH-. Mind you, in ordinary water there were very few of these and unless you were interested in chemistry the picture of a bag of marbles was still pretty accurate. Ice was different. Here the shape of the marbles became important and because the molecule was no longer rotating and precessing its motion had been frozen into a giant structure of connected wishbones. A structure which consisted of sheets of crinkly hexagons with connecting struts and ties between the sheets. A structure I visualised as a rather badly behaved graphite. I suppose people looked upon carbon in much the same way. There were two frozen forms, Diamond and graphite. and there was the amorphous form analogous to water only solid rather than liquid, and there were the individual carbon atoms or small amorphous clumps of these atoms which constituted things like soot. So one had an image of water where the liquid was virtually unstructured and the solid was highly structured with no structure in between. It's a bit like a city consisting of enormous skyscrapers and telephone boxes except, of course, that, for water, the differential in structural size is very much greater. It must have come as a delightful surprise for people to discover those intermediate sized structures in Carbon, the buckminterfullerenes to give them their full title. The huge potential of these relatively newly found structures is now slowly being exploited. We now know that, like carbon, liquid water also has a range of intermediate structures between the molecule and the crystal. This can be appreciated by anyone who cares to visit Professor Chaplin's extensive web site. As far as I know there has been little explicit exploitation of these structures. Partly no doubt because they are so dynamic, unlike the fullerenes. One can separate out fullerenes into different sizes and types. One can't do that with water, not physically anyway. One can of course separate them out conceptually in the same way the Jeans separated out molecules of different speed groups when he developed gas dynamics. Now Meyer was implicitly manipulating the high level structures in water. He may have been aware of the energy potential of high level structuring but since he wasn't a scientist or structural research engineer, I rather doubt it. Did he discover how to rip H20 apart? I think he probably did. And if he was outed then it is because others thought so too. [I can't understand why Jones seemed so confident that Meyer wasn't murdered. Whistling to keep his courage up? 8-) ] Normal direct current electrolysis tackles the taking apart of H20 at the most basic level. It's as though on a building site someone comes along and picks up the basic unit wishbones which are going to form the space structure and rips them apart. Simple electrolysis is a brute force and ignorance approach and it's hardly surprising if you are going to have put as much energy in ripping the individual wishbones apart at you get back when they reunite. Simple electrolysis is also the straw man Meyer's purblind critics employed not only to rubbish his discovery but even to get a court judgement against him by a judge who's knowledge of science was clearly inadequate. If one reads up on Meyer it's quite evident that he was NOT employing conventional electrolysis. Meyer's big problem was, he wasn't a scientist and he didn't really understand what he was doing. Consequently, apart from a physical demonstration, he was incapable of persuading ignoramuses and faint hearts (with commendable exceptions) that he had achieved anything. So what was he doing and how did he manage to generate hydrogen and oxygen using less energy than he would have needed using brute force and ignorance electrolysis? Good question. 8-) If you're fabricating a structure using wishbone shaped elements then you necessarily finish up with a collection of struts and ties. By definition the struts are the connections in compression strain (positive strain energy say) and the ties are the elements in tensile strain (negative strain energy say). Without these strains the structure will not hold together. Any large structure contains more energy than the unconnected individual elements from which they were made. Anyone familiar with the statistical technique, Multifactor Analysis of Variance, will recognise the term Interaction AB which is that amount over and above (or below since it can be negative) the sum of A and B. And they will also appreciate that the more factors there are, the more interactions there are. Suppose we have just five factor (or H2O wishbones in our case) Then apart from the sum of: A + B + C + D + E =================================================== we have the sum of the first order interactions: AB + AC + AD + AE + BC + BD + BE + CD + CE + DE plus the sum of the second order interactions: ABC + ABD + ABE + BCD + BCE + CDE plus the sum of the third order interactions: ABCD + ABCE + BCDE plus the fourth order interaction: ABCDE As the interaction order increases the size of the structure it represents increases and the strain energy, both positive and negative increased. The unit components of these structures will have a wide spectrum of stability and in the least stable individual base components, wishbones molecules will be near breaking point. One might say, water is a classic case of the whole being greater than the sum of the parts. If one selectively pumps energy into these quasi- explosive components then they can be broken apart with far less energy than that need to break isolated molecules of H2O. Suppose 100 units of energy are required to break an isolated water molecule which is not part of a structure. Imagine that same molecule in a structure where it so constrained by the rest of the structure that it is 90% of the way to breaking apart. Such a component will only need 1/10th of the energy for fracture and will give up 10/10ths of its energy when it recombines as a single molecule. Like water, nitroglycerin is also a liquid. Its in- built strain energy can easily be released by brute force and ignorance and very little brute force at that. When it was first introduced a number of appalling catastrophes led to the liquid being widely banned. The problem was overcome by mixing nitro with inert absorbents such as the kieselguhr, a soft, chalk-like, rock. This made is safer cos a lot more brute force was needed to release the energy albeit only slightly less ignorance. Water may be thought of as a very safe explosive consisting of an explosive fraction and an inert quasi-kieselguhr fraction which makes the liquid safe to handle. Furthermore the explosive parts are locked away in a strong steel safe. Unless you know the combination, unless you know which component is near breaking point, and how to focus trigger energy there to release the strain energy, then it is not going to explode. The heavily strained H2O molecules are not going to crack open for you whereas with a traditional explosive like dynamite or TNT which are locked in wooden desks, all that's needed is a jemmy in the form of a detonator. With nitro, ignorance of internal structure is no bar to releasing the energy, In contrast, with water ignorance is fatal to getting out more energy than you put in. With water knowledge is at a premium and brute force is useless. Brute force will not open the safe containing the explosives. Only knowledge of the combination will do that. So how does one find this combination, this recipe, this formula which will inch the most heavily strained structural components to the tipping point. If we were structural engineers operating at the atomic level and the structures were static and not dynamic then the answer would be easy. In the case of a long series of arches for example all one needs to do is remove the abutment at one end. The arches will the each collapse in turn until the other abutment is reached. This progressive collapse is the macro equivalent of a detonator's shock wave. If you're not lucky enough to know the combination then you do what the drug manufactures do; you do what Edison did; you try everything. You keep putting coins in the fruit machine until you get three bananas. That is what Stan Meyer did. And from all appearances he did find a line of fruit. Now if I can work out why Meyer might have succeeded, and probably did, then a lot of other people could have realised that possibility too. Not everybody is so stupid as to think that water is a collection of independent isolated molecules and that one can only get the work out that one puts in. The energy barons have plenty of scientific advisers in their employ who are just as clever as the members of this discussion group. If one of us can see the solution, then sure as God made little green apples, one of them can too. Which puts Stan's demise in rather a different light. If I were an energy oligarch, unconstrained by any moral considerations, would I run the risk of someone developing something which would seriously i...
cobra519