Following insightful private email on the Joe Cell device, here is
more detail regarding the key claimed feature - "implosion" :
RvS: "I assume you are referring to the fact that they adjust the
timing to close to bottom dead center, then claim that the motor
is driven by implosion."
Yes but it is too bad that the anecdotes are not in agreement on
these details, so one must surmise on the general modality based
on incomplete and conflicting reports.
Note also that "implosion" has also been said (in a totally
different line of experiments) to be a key feature of "Brown's
gas". The more correct accounting for this phenomenon is that : in
"common manifold" electrolysis (i.e. mixed lean H2 laced gas),
there can be a brief and colorless "explosion," followed
immediately by a more easily discernable "implosion" - such that
the observer comes away with the sensory impression of an
implosion-only - in circumstances where very lean hydrogen is
exploded.
"The problem that I have with their [Joe cell] scenario is that
atmospheric pressure is nowhere near enough to deliver the claimed
power output. I.e. even if they achieved a perfect vacuum in the
cylinder, the highest pressure they would get would be 1 atm."
Agreed. Even a complete vacuum operating against STP cannot
account for the power claimed.
"Therefore I see only two possibilities:-
1) Vacuum is correct but is actually beta-atmosphere vacuum =>
high power.
2) Vacuum is not correct, but ignition takes a while to occur,
requiring that spark be very much advanced."
Good. But more information is needed. It could be that - like with
common manifold electrolysis (with or without the necessity for
"orgone" itself) there is a substantial but very quick explosion,
followed so quickly by a slower implosion, such that the observer
only sees the later. In which case timing is key.
Actually in a 2-cycle engine, fueled by extremely lean H2 you get
an effect which is identical to the explosion/implosion effect
which is witnessed in some accounts of the Joe cell. This
"implosion" becomes more a matter of sensory perception. the $64
question is: is there more to this scenario then common-manifold
electrolysis ? (i.e. is there some extra like "orgone"?)
This is one reason why some of these Joe Cell devices - the ones
where the higher voltage (12 volts) is not removed after startup -
may be nothing more than Meyer-type electrolysis cells. Check out
Meyer's cell design - concentric stainless steel cylinders -
coincidence? Surprising that Joe cell proponents seldom mention
the Meyer connection.
As to how-and-why they can self-power an ICE engine: the answer is
hidden in the crankcase.
The very-lean hydrogen which can be generated on-board, using
self-power only, is not sufficient to power the engine by itself
but it is, in actuality, burning away the thin oil film that
reappears on the cylinder every time the piston is wetted in the
crankcase. This small amount of additional hydrocarbon (in the oil
lubricant) is what allows for complete self-power in most of these
anecdotes. Remove the lubrication (or preferably substitute a
mineral lubricant to prevent piston seizure) and the engine will
NOT self-power with a Joe cell. (this is my contention - until it
is proven otherwise).
This is the reason why some of the Joe cells seem to stop after an
hour or two - they have burned up all the lubrication in the
crankcase ! (and done it very efficiently) . Of course in a two
cycle engine you get some of this crankcase oil in the intake air,
directly. The flame speed of H2 is INCREDIBLE and that is what
"seems" to cause a more noticeable implosion following a very
brief explosion - and that is what allows the hydrocarbon film to
be burned off the cylinder wall - which will not happen with
gasoline alone (i.e. gasoline can not be burned lean-enough nor
fast-enough in flame speed - in order to send a lot of hot O2 to
impinge on the cylinder wall, and to therefore burn off the
lubricant).
Actually I am of the belief that it may be possible to use very
lean hydrogen from on-board electrolysis in order to drive a
2-cycle engine - where a fuel like #2 fuel oil (which is a
lubricant) is admitted from the crankcase and the carburetor is
discarded. This could be economical and marketable as a solution
for 2-cycle engines... and it can happen...
...even without orgone - which is something that, to be honest, I
personally do NOT believe in (yet) while at the same time am
keeping an open mind pending some semblance of scientific proof.
And after spending many hours reviewing the W. Reich material, it
is so far from scientific proof as to be laughable, IMHO, but that
does not mean that it is necessarily wrong. However, it could have
been easily validated scientifically, yet it was not - so the only
logical assumption (pending proof) is: it is wrong but
intriguingly-wrong.
... BTW, I could write a whole essay on the many nuances of how
"entriguingly-wrong" is a necessary precedent to a great
scientific breakthrough. Set your spam filters accordingly ;-)
Jones
