How did you come to this conclusion? Have I missed a video that Russ powered a second opposing cylinder from the feedback of the first?
Are you referring to some other papper engine built by somebody else? I think you may be guilty again of conflating anecdotal evidence from various videos to come to the wrong conclusion. But, I would be very much happier if I am wrong. That would only mean we can free ourselves from raghead slavery. So, please correct me. Jojo ----- Original Message ----- From: Axil Axil To: [email protected] Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2012 12:58 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Open Source Papp Update One point about the energy balance that you have not considered is the amount of energy contained in the feedback current that Russ is seeing when the plasma is relaxing. This current jumped an air gap, blew out all his high powered diodes along with his neon light. This feedback current was strong enough to power the alternate cylinder in a two cylinder configuration making the Papp engine self-powered after the initial startup excitation. Cheers: Axil On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 12:37 AM, Jojo Jaro <[email protected]> wrote: Axil, Russ delivers 1000 joules of energy per spark with his high voltage and huge capacitor banks. If he does this at a continuous rate of 1 spark per second, that would be 1000 Watts of energy delivered/inputted into his papper cylinder. It seems to me that the piston jump of 6 inches with a light weight piston DOES NOT equate to 1000 Watts of power. This does not look like it is overunity. This appears to be just ordinary thermodynamic expansion of the gas due to inputted energy. Nothing appears to be special here. Now, I am willing to be wrong. I do not have the time nor the inclination to watch all his videos from 1 to 11. I watch 9 and 11 partially. In his other videos, did he mention how much the weight of his piston is? If he did, maybe you can calculate the amount of work performed on the piston with a 6 inch travel upwards. This would probably be around 10%-20% efficiency, which would totally be consistent with a thermodynamic expansion cycle of a compressed gas. Seems to me this is nothing more than an internal combustion engine, with the spark providing the raw energy for gas expansion. Funny, but Papp may have found a clever and "magician trick" way of running an internal combustion engine making it appear to be overunity. With the process appearing to work with normal air, and now hydrogen, the noble gas "mixture" may just have been a convenient and effective "magician's sleight of hand technique" to divert attention from his engine just being an ordinary Internal Combustion Engine. Everybody was focusing on the "novelty" of using a certain "magic formula" of noble gases that nobody bothered to check the energy balance. I believe this is what happened. Jojo ----- Original Message ----- From: Axil Axil To: [email protected] Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2012 7:58 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Open Source Papp Update Video #11, tends to support my belief that the power, force, and speed of gas expansion is inversely proportional to the duration of the spark. When the duration of the spark is short, the compressive force of the gas grows large. A very short spark is a powerful spark. This powerful spark will produce a powerful and forceful expansion of the gas. To get gas expansion to the maximum, the duration of the spark must be reduced to the minimum duration possible. To optimize gas performance, I recommend a spark rise time under 50 nanoseconds with a very short duration to produce the most powerful explosive and forceful expansion of the gas. Video #11 shows that a continuous high voltage spark does not cause gas expansion, but a short and powerful spark with a very short duration does. It is not the energy that the spark carries in joules. It is how fast this energy is delivered to the gas. This is analogous to how explosives perform. Low explosives are compounds where the rate of decomposition proceeds through the material at less than the speed of sound. The decomposition is propagated by a flame front (deflagration) which travels much more slowly through the explosive material than a shock wave of a high explosive. High explosives are explosive materials that detonate, meaning that the explosive shock front passes through the material at a supersonic speed. Some theory Because of the Pauli Exclusion Principle, no two electrons can orbit the atom on the same quantum level. Electron degeneracy pressure is a particular manifestation of the more general phenomenon of quantum degeneracy pressure. The Pauli Exclusion Principle disallows two half integer spin particles (fermions, that is electrons) from simultaneously occupying the same quantum state. The resulting emergent repulsive force is manifested as a pressure against compression of matter into smaller volumes of space. Electron degeneracy pressure results from the same underlying mechanism that defines the electron orbital structure of elemental matter. When electrons are squeezed too close together, the exclusion principle requires them to have different energy levels. To add another electron to a given volume requires raising an electron's energy level to make room, and this requirement for energy to compress the material appears as a pressure. A big spark packs large numbers of electrons into fixed volume in a very short amount of time and the gas explodes due to electrostatic increasing repulsion. At any given instant, the more electrons that are added to a gas, the bigger the gas atoms gets in that fixed timeframe. This causes electrostatic pressure increase as all the atoms of the gas grow bigger at the same fixed instant of time. If the spark pulse is short and powerful enough, an electrostatic shock wave may be produced that may then result in an intense level of compression and electron nuclear screening which then results in associated nuclear reactions. It is well known the lightning produces gamma rays neutrons and transmutation of matter. This electrostatic shock wave may be causing this type of nuclear activity. QED. On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 6:02 PM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote: It's not exactly a proof of principle - and in fact it is closer to a disproof of principle. He gets little to no effect from the Noble gas mixture, but gets an interesting effect from hydrogen. It is probably a hydrino effect. The violet color is indicative of UV emission, which is the signature of the Mill's f/H reaction. Papp says over and over that he does not use hydrogen in his mix, and the Rohner's agree. Therefore since hydrogen gives a rather strong effect, and the Nobel gas mix gives almost none, by comparison, this amounts to a rather compelling disproof of principle for Papp and/or a putative NGE. Jones From: Axil Axil https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBWiWftGknI&list=UULuDKTNDFfat7iO7KGE7fQA&in dex=1&feature=plcp
