Sorry, Seemed to have made a few mistakes...in too much of a rush. To be clear. The initial statement is correct: Initial resistance in water (29.63V / 0.59mA) = 50K2 Ohms.[0.00059A and 50,200 Ohms] End resistance (27.6V / 5.95mA) = 4K6 Ohms [0.00595A and 4,600 Ohms] which showed a conductivity of 13uS (about 15ppm).
That is a drop in solution resistance (as measured between the electrodes) of 54,800 Ohms, or a factor of 0.092. To corroborate this 'fantastic' drop in resistance (increase in conductivity) please note the equivalent resistance and conductivity values per cm as will be read by a standard conductivity meter: 1,000,000 Ohms = 1uS (about 1ppm Ag+ not including fudge factor) 250,000 Ohms = 4uS (about 4ppm Ag+) 100,000 Ohms = 10uS (about 10ppm Ag+) 76,923 Ohms = 13uS (about 13ppm Ag+) 66,666 Ohms = 15uS (about 15ppm Ag+) 50,000 Ohms = 20uS (about 20ppm Ag+) Hope I got it right this time :-) Ivan. > -----Original Message----- > From: Harvey Norris [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, 17 February 2003 9:56 a.m. > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: CS>Desirable % of voltage decrease? > > > > --- Ron Cuthbertson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > >Yes, (I presume you mean dividing 27.6V by > > 0.00595A), and yes I did > > >mean 0.00595A or 0.595mA. > > >4K6 = 46,000 Ohms. > > > > Should 4K6 not equal 4,600 Ohms? > > > > Ron > > -- > > Ron Cuthbertson > I was confused about this also, but I think Ivan meant > the 46,000 ohms. Another part of the problem is also > the fact that 0.00595 A is 5.95 ma, not the stated > 0.595 ma. This is why I noted that would be a > fantastic increase of conductivity if it changed in a > 10 fold manner like that. > > I think I now concur with the rest of the group that > this dual coin submerged, higher voltage AC approach > is worthless. The decreases in voltage I observed were > also accompanied by a heating of the water, thus the > condensation under the plastic coin holder. After the > water recooled to household temperature this apparent > voltage drop was not so evident. Today I started at > 680 volts @ 8.5 ma, and ended 1 hr 15 min later at 540 > volts @ 8.54 ma. Checking this same thing much later > again showed the 680 volts, but at 8.38 ma? I also > noted that exposing the water to very high voltage > afterwards changed readings. That process is only a > single electrode process where high voltage is placed > between the bottom of the glass and the coins, so that > no complete electrical circuit is across the water. > This is a different process entirely unrelated to CS, > and is used to procure a neon disharge for a Rife type > treatment, from SrFe magnet windings under the steel > plate the water glass rests on. This process also can > produce prodigious ozone, with a buzzing noise made by > the magnet. After 40 minutes, and reconnecting the > process of AC conduction across the water: the new > readings showed 740 volts across the coins, with a > smaller conduction of 8.08 ma, after this glass of > water from coins to bottom glass surface was exposed > to an estimated 7000 volts in that process. > Here are some jpegs of this Rife/Lakhovsky process > Magnet windings under CS glass process > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/files/MED/Dsc00449.jpg > Lakhovsky adaptation to Rife treatment (the magnet > windings wire endings go to this neon part) > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/files/MED/Dsc00451.jpg > Close up scoping of EM emmited by patients finger; .2 > volts/div, 10 us/div > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/files/MED/Dsc00452.jpg > > It surprises me that such a lower voltage ending > reading on the CS process itself could be caused by a > temperature increase like that, as that seems opposite > to traditional thinking of temperature vs > conductivity. Even though these poor CS production > aspects revealed themselves, I still note a grayish > tarnish made on the coins, and after longer runs some > surface water deposits. But I will go by what the > experts say, the LVDC approach should definitely > produce a correct product, and my opinions should be > considered "out to lunch" for now... But first I will > next try a fullwave DC bridge before the coins on this > same process to see if similar things happen, as my > diodes are rated for 600 volts, so I could be safe in > trying runs at 70% of that voltage. > HDN > > > > __________________________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Shopping - Send Flowers for Valentine's Day > http://shopping.yahoo.com > > > -- > The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of > colloidal silver. > > Instructions for unsubscribing may be found at: > http://silverlist.org > > To post, address your message to: [email protected] > > Silver-list archive: > http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html > > List maintainer: Mike Devour <[email protected]> >
