sci.energy.hydrogen

knews4u2chew@ wrote:

> His process is called "Eletrical Polarization."
> 4,936,961 Method for the Production of a Fuel Gas
> "Electrical Polarization Process" (USA)
> This is a "process patent."
> It was reviewed inder section 101 of the PTO.
>
> "Stan Meyer, did, in fact, under 35 USC 101 demonstrate to the PTO
> that his technology works.
>
> Ever read this?
Which? The patent? Yes.
>

> "Patent examiners."
Who just look at a piece of paper to determine if it is NEW and
sufficently different. Patents are about protecting IDEAS. Only
perpetual motions machines are now required to be demonstrated in the USA.

> "Seconded experts"

Or in other words "consultants"
>
>
>>Gullible investors are not reputable.
>
>
> Dean of Engineering, Research Chemist, et al.
What sort of chemistry? Did he actually know anything about nuclear
reactions? or Electrolysis?

It doesn't matter who he ran a demonstration in front of, what science
requires is that other people can replicate the result, then science
regards it as real.

There in lies the problem; no one has replicated Meyers results. Either
he didn't give the full information in his patent and thus made it
worthless or it didn't work.

Frankly, there isn't anything special in the specs. I could go out and
rig it up with crap from my garage.


>
> Meyer claims to have run a converted VW on hydrogen/oxygen
> mixture for the last four years using a chain of six cylindrical
> cells.

did you stop and think about what you posted?
A chain implies that they operated in series, each processing the output
of the last one, which, if his cell works, would be unneccessary.

Bank, . parallel maybe, but that is nothing and could be achieved by
electrolysis now.