Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
The comparator I use will stand 36 volts. All leads are either zener diode protected or have 346K resistors in series. All this RF stuff is over my head but the circuits were designed by a engineer who deals with it daily. Ode At 01:17 PM 6/16/2003 -0400, you wrote: url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m60257.html Re: CS>$$$ perpectives From: Mike Monett Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 06:48:22 I wrote: CMOS is very sensitive to esd. TTL draws more power, but is pretty much immune. The headaches really scramble my thinking. This statement is true, but useless in this context. CMOS can be damaged or destroed by ESD events. There is protection at the inputs, but it is only good enough to pass the industry test so the product can be shipped. It will not survive the strong esd events that can occur in ordinary use. Another problem is an esd event can cause the device to go into latchup and be destroyed if the power supply can deliver enough current. Usually several hundred mA will do it. This is what I was thinking of when I said TTL is immune. TTL cannot go into latchup, but it is most certainly affected by esd and rfi. However, the comparator inputs are not TTL. I don't know which device you guys are using - very few that can withstand 30 volts differential across the inputs. If the device is CMOS, I'd make sure there was very good protection at the inputs, especially on systems that have long leads. The same filter techique to protect against rfi works for esd. But you really have to check it carefully. ESD risetimes can be sub-nanosecond with currents in the hundreds or thousands of amps. The problem this causes is the voltage can arc across the series resistor at the input. If the bypass cap inductance is high, or the traces are too long, this can allow very high voltage to appear at the input to the device. This can damage the thin oxide or create latent defects that fail months later. You will never know why. It won't occur often enough to seem to be a serious problem. But each time it happens, someone will lose their unit until it is repaired. However, rfi or esd protection can ultimately be defeated. No matter how much you install, there is always some place where it won't work. Walking across the carpet in Colorado during the winter can draw 1 inch arcs. This is over 30kV. That really takes good filtering to minimize the effects. You will never eliminate them completely. If you are in an industrial area, being next door to an arc welding outfit is not a good idea. If there is a high powered transmitter nearby, it can also cause havoc with sensitive comparators. I once found a huge problem when a laser company moved in next door. They used 10 KW heaters to melt the glass. The temperature was controlled with a simple bimetallic thermostat. When the contacts opened, they produced a small arc. This resonated with nearby wiring and pruduced a huge spike at 40 MHz. I meaured the frequency by triggering a scope and seeing the rf pulse in my lab. This severely disrupted the product I was working on. The cure was simple in this case. A snubber across each contact provided enough damping to kill the arc. The snubber was a 47 ohm resistor in series with 0.1uF right at the contacts. But it took a while to figure out where the noise was coming from. And there will always be the next one... Best Regards, Mike Monett -- 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: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour
Re: CS>RE: Re: CS>$$$ perpectives (verification)
I knew this was going to happen Subject: Spam Arrest Verification Confirmation Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 12:55:40 -0700 (PDT) From: "support-at-spamarrest.com |Feb 2003 G|" Dear Mike Monett, Thank you for verifying your email address with Spam Arrest! Your email has been forwarded to leeel...@flash.net's inbox. All of your future emails to leeel...@flash.net will also be delivered directly into their inbox. It only takes a second to create dozens of email addresses at sneakemail. And even less time to kill old addresses. Go harvest your spam addresses somewhere else. Best Regards, Mike Monett -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. Instructions for unsubscribing may be found at: http://silverlist.org To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour
CS>RE: Re: CS>$$$ perpectives (verification)
I just received the following: - Subject: RE: Re: CS>$$$ perpectives (verification) Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 10:23:57 -0700 From: "leeelder-at-flash.net leeelder=flash.net-at-spamarrest.com |Feb 2003 G|" <26xuhgl4b...@sneakemail.com> Reply-To: "leeelder-at-flash.net leeelder-at-flash.net |Feb 2003 G|" leeel...@flash.net here, I'm protecting myself from receiving junk mail. Just this once, click the link below so I can receive your emails. You won't have to do this again. http://spamarrest.com/a?419103501:355004 Yeah, Right. Why do you think I would want to send you an email? Best Regards, Mike Monett -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. Instructions for unsubscribing may be found at: http://silverlist.org To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
Ken, Without stirring there is a noticeable difference in the shutoff point which can be controlled by electrode spacing. But with stirring it is much less pronounced. The reason is that the ions are more evenly distributed when stirred. The conductivity gradient in unstirred is very high between the electrodes. In this case a small difference in spacing can be easily noticed by the shutoff circuitry. However in that case the PWT reading will also drop considerably further after shutoff. In a stirred unit electrode spacing has much wider tolerance because the ions are being spread out in the water and it takes much longer to get the same amount of conductivity between the electrodes. With our table top stirring units one can increase the PPM by spreading or reduce it by closing the spacing but it is a very broad adjustment. Not critical at all. Trem - Original Message - From: "Ode Coyote" To: Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 6:36 AM Subject: Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > > >Trem > > I have found that a small variation actually does matter. > In the old silverpuppy models, I could significantly vary the > concentration at shut down just by bending the electrode ends towards or > away from each other..and not by very much either. > But that was before using stirring and a conductive track tended to form > in a 'U' shape at the bottom between the ends. The electrodes were > straight back then. That could all have something to do with it. > > Granted, an eyeball is good enough to get consistancy. An eyeball can be > quite accurate. > I tried the strips first and had a hard time with them. That's all. > > Ode > > > > "Our electrodes are .25 inches wide and .013 inches thick. If they > > are submersed 4 inches, the total surface area will be 4.21 square > > inches. This is 2.5 times the wetted surface area of 14 gauge > > wires. Therefore the current density of 14 gauge wires will be 2.5 > > times higher than the electrodes we use. What this means is, the > > amount of silver released using our electrodes will be so spread > > out over the surface of the electrodes, it will be releasing at a > > slower pace. If the silver is released more slowly, the particles > > are smaller. They will also be more uniform in size because of the > > constant current regulator and stirring. The result is a more > > uniform, small particle size colloid." > > > > A 0.013 flat ribbon will be difficult to keep straight. This means > > it will be difficult to keep a uniform electrode spacing from top to > > bottom. > > > >Not really. Let's use the SG6 as the example. This isn't rocket science > >and most people can see when two electrodes are fairly parallel because > >they're attached to the unit with binding posts. > > > > While a small variation probably doesn't matter, you will be > > constantly fussing with it and wondering if it is affecting the > > results. It is not worth the hassle. > > > > > -- > 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: silver-list@eskimo.com > > Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html > > List maintainer: Mike Devour > > > >
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m60257.html Re: CS>$$$ perpectives From: Mike Monett Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 06:48:22 I wrote: CMOS is very sensitive to esd. TTL draws more power, but is pretty much immune. The headaches really scramble my thinking. This statement is true, but useless in this context. CMOS can be damaged or destroed by ESD events. There is protection at the inputs, but it is only good enough to pass the industry test so the product can be shipped. It will not survive the strong esd events that can occur in ordinary use. Another problem is an esd event can cause the device to go into latchup and be destroyed if the power supply can deliver enough current. Usually several hundred mA will do it. This is what I was thinking of when I said TTL is immune. TTL cannot go into latchup, but it is most certainly affected by esd and rfi. However, the comparator inputs are not TTL. I don't know which device you guys are using - very few that can withstand 30 volts differential across the inputs. If the device is CMOS, I'd make sure there was very good protection at the inputs, especially on systems that have long leads. The same filter techique to protect against rfi works for esd. But you really have to check it carefully. ESD risetimes can be sub-nanosecond with currents in the hundreds or thousands of amps. The problem this causes is the voltage can arc across the series resistor at the input. If the bypass cap inductance is high, or the traces are too long, this can allow very high voltage to appear at the input to the device. This can damage the thin oxide or create latent defects that fail months later. You will never know why. It won't occur often enough to seem to be a serious problem. But each time it happens, someone will lose their unit until it is repaired. However, rfi or esd protection can ultimately be defeated. No matter how much you install, there is always some place where it won't work. Walking across the carpet in Colorado during the winter can draw 1 inch arcs. This is over 30kV. That really takes good filtering to minimize the effects. You will never eliminate them completely. If you are in an industrial area, being next door to an arc welding outfit is not a good idea. If there is a high powered transmitter nearby, it can also cause havoc with sensitive comparators. I once found a huge problem when a laser company moved in next door. They used 10 KW heaters to melt the glass. The temperature was controlled with a simple bimetallic thermostat. When the contacts opened, they produced a small arc. This resonated with nearby wiring and pruduced a huge spike at 40 MHz. I meaured the frequency by triggering a scope and seeing the rf pulse in my lab. This severely disrupted the product I was working on. The cure was simple in this case. A snubber across each contact provided enough damping to kill the arc. The snubber was a 47 ohm resistor in series with 0.1uF right at the contacts. But it took a while to figure out where the noise was coming from. And there will always be the next one... Best Regards, Mike Monett -- 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: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m60250.html Re: CS>$$$ perpectives From: Ode Coyote Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 03:47:57 >> I use a comparator circuit as well. > With a couple of very large capacitors in the rectifier circuit > and an isolating cap on the trigger voltage feedback circuit, the > comparator takes as much as 40 seconds to trigger off at a dead > short below the trigger voltage. > No static spike is not going to get absorbed from the power supply > end and the water damps out static on the business end. > Like Trem says..bulletproof. > PS I don't use mosfets etc [TTL , I believe..virtually immune to > spikes blowing them out] > Ode CMOS is very sensitive to esd. TTL draws more power, but is pretty much immune. However, RFI problems can be tricky. The dielectric constant for water is around 80, so the capacitance between the probes is negligible. There will be little damping effect, and the probes will act as short antennas. Placing a dead short on the trigger voltage may not be telling you much. What counts is how much rfi appears at the probe input to the comparator. This is much more difficult to measure. However, your unit has very short connections between the comparator and the electrodes. This helps by reducing the capture area for esd and rfi events. Your pcb also has very short traces, so the stray inductance is low. This also reduces the effect of rfi, since the impedance at high frequencies is much lower than a system with long leads. So basically you have a little 7 inch antenna at the comparator input, which will not pick up much rfi at low frequencies. It will pick up cellular phones quite well, but the comparator is probably much too slow to respond. It might be an idea to check, though. A big electrolytic at the comparator input helps with low frequency events, but the series inductance limits the bypassing effectiveness to frequencies less than about 100KHz. This may be quite adequate in your system due to the very short traces. If the comparator were connected to long leads and noise proved to be a problem, it might be useful to add small resistors in series with the comparator input pins, say 1K, and small caps from the input pins to the nearest ground reference, probably the negative supply pin for the comparator. The 1K resistors would add negligible offset to the comparison voltage, and having equal values on both inputs would tend to cancel the offset. A small surface mount tantalum has pretty low series inductance into the megahertz region. A 1K in series with a 1uF cap has a corner frequency of 159 Hz and would provide 40dB attenuation above 100KHz. If cellular phone transmissions were a problem, additional 1nF SMD caps across the tantalums should eliminate the rfi. So it looks like everything is under control, but it's a good idea to check. A bad component or solder joint can create wierd symptoms that would be difficult to diagnose. The electric drill test is a crude but effective way to see if there is a sensitivity to noise. If it passes with the drill held near the electrodes, and phones don't trigger it, I'd say it is probably good enough. But you have to do the test when the run is almost finished. Doing it at the start of the run will tell you nothing, since the comparator inputs have such a large voltage difference. Best Regards, Mike Monett -- 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: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
I use a comparator circuit as well. With a couple of very large capacitors in the rectifier circuit and an isolating cap on the trigger voltage feedback circuit, the comparator takes as much as 40 seconds to trigger off at a dead short below the trigger voltage. No static spike is not going to get absorbed from the power supply end and the water damps out static on the business end. Like Trem says..bulletproof. PS I don't use mosfets etc [TTL , I believe..virtually immune to spikes blowing them out] Ode It's not a problem. The units are not triggered by static electricity unless one touches one of the electrodes when it is in open air and even then it is difficult to trigger. It requires a certain amount of resistance between electrodes to trigger. The generator circuit measures voltage drop across the resistance and compares it to the dial setting voltage. When they are the same the unit shuts off. > It should be possible to see if this is the problem by starting a > batch and turning on an ordinary electric drill nearby. If the > system shuts down immediately, suspect rfi getting into the > comparator. Doesn't do a thing. As stated above. Nothing shuts it down except the resistance in the water or the use of an external resistor for calibration purposes. Pretty much bulletproof in operation. -- 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: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
Trem I have found that a small variation actually does matter. In the old silverpuppy models, I could significantly vary the concentration at shut down just by bending the electrode ends towards or away from each other..and not by very much either. But that was before using stirring and a conductive track tended to form in a 'U' shape at the bottom between the ends. The electrodes were straight back then. That could all have something to do with it. Granted, an eyeball is good enough to get consistancy. An eyeball can be quite accurate. I tried the strips first and had a hard time with them. That's all. Ode "Our electrodes are .25 inches wide and .013 inches thick. If they are submersed 4 inches, the total surface area will be 4.21 square inches. This is 2.5 times the wetted surface area of 14 gauge wires. Therefore the current density of 14 gauge wires will be 2.5 times higher than the electrodes we use. What this means is, the amount of silver released using our electrodes will be so spread out over the surface of the electrodes, it will be releasing at a slower pace. If the silver is released more slowly, the particles are smaller. They will also be more uniform in size because of the constant current regulator and stirring. The result is a more uniform, small particle size colloid." A 0.013 flat ribbon will be difficult to keep straight. This means it will be difficult to keep a uniform electrode spacing from top to bottom. Not really. Let's use the SG6 as the example. This isn't rocket science and most people can see when two electrodes are fairly parallel because they're attached to the unit with binding posts. While a small variation probably doesn't matter, you will be constantly fussing with it and wondering if it is affecting the results. It is not worth the hassle. -- 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: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
Mike I think what's missing here is that most of the particles that do form...that don't from while in production, form hours and days AFTER the process has been completed. Personally, I want 'some' particles because it's said that particles do different things than ions in different applications and do no harm. This is a matter of philosophy. The trick is to make small ones and it doesn't really matter 'when' they form as long as they stay small. If the CS is quite strong, some particles are bound to form no matter how slow the process is simply because it's a super saturated solution. If the ions are well hydrated, they'll be and remain small. Proper hydration depends on relative water circulation and ion production rates per square inch of electrode. If you circulate the water vigerously, you can increase the ion production rate on a given electrode size [use higher current] But, if the water is circulated too vigerously, you get energetic collisions with the electrodes and deposit buildups. Every setup that considers all the factors involved has it's own "sweet spot". Your sweet spot is huge, but very slow...or the generator must be very big. My mechanical stir generators had a variable speed stirrer that was too complicated to operate for the average person who couldn't get the hang of just what the sweet spot should look like. And I just didn't have the language skills to convey that vision to people who don't or can't comprehend the process. So, I quit and went very simple. No frills, minimal skills. [with an option to go beyond that if desired] Going very very slowly is safe..but the results, if done right, are pretty much the same. An ion is an ion the world around. If there are enough of them in a given space at a given temperature , particles will form sooner or later. There are many ways to do the same thing right and many more ways to do it wrong. "Done right" is the tricky part when dealing with MR/MS average person and it has to be incorporated into an easy to understand package that's easy to handle and doesn't take so long as to make people pull their hair out. Mike, you're an exception to the rule. You actually have a clue. But there are other realities 'out there' where many people don't have one and just want to plug and play with something that doesn't cost a fortune, look like Frankenstein made it and does it easily in a reasonable amount of time. Ode At 04:32 PM 6/13/2003 -0400, you wrote: url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m60176.html Re: CS>$$$ perpectives From: Trem Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 12:31:40 Hi Trem, Thanks for taking the time to carefully review my post. I know we all started using the same kind of system, so everyone is used to the same result. But I was very surprised to find what happens at much lower current density. When does your system go into current limiting? At 30 ma and 22.5 sq. in. you are running at 30/22.5 = 1.33 mA/ sq. in. That is very close to what I used to use. So your process maintains a fairly high voltage across the cell for much of the brew time, and the current limiting doesn't start right away. These are ideal conditions for the formation of particles. Running at much lower current density (~100uA/sq. in) doesn't produce them for the same number of Coulombs transferred. But until we can get a good handle on measuring ppm consistently, this won't mean much to you. Best Regards, Mike Monett -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. Instructions for unsubscribing may be found at: http://silverlist.org To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
Mechanical stirring can be tricky. Trem is well aware of the tricks. Both of us have spent mega hours over several years in real time 'cut and try' experimentation to come up with what we have. We agree on most things discovered independently. We have different preferences and purpose, that's all. I send people his way and he sends people my way depending on what their needs and skills are. I quit making mechanical stir generators because it required some minor skill to operate them properly. [I don't know if Trems do or not] That, when I've had some of the really simple thermal units returned because people couldn't figure out how to plug things in. [NO skills at all , zero comprehension of any device and total inability to follow the simplest instructions] I've had some returned because thay wouldn't fizz and bubble and make bright yellow CS due to an unmoveable preset notion that that's what should happen. Wire VS strips? Both work well under the right conditions. The differences are mostly a matter of design preference. Ode At 12:29 PM 6/13/2003 -0700, you wrote: Mike, I guess the reason for stirring is because I use higher current density because of the close electrode spacing on our high speed units and that absolutely requires it. The combination of the two speeds the process dramatically and that's what I was after when designing the unit. Most people want to make a good product and at the same time not wait a long time for the process to be done. I've accomplished that and am very pleased with the results as attested to by the fact that the CS never agglomerates (see the electron microscope photos) and is highly ionic. What more would one want than speed of production, ease of use, automatic shutoff and a good product? I'm not about to change the design just because someone says the electrodes will not blacken if I use much lower current and don't stir. That would also require increasing electrode spacing dramatically since I use one half inch spacing. I think you're not considering the water flow is vigorous enough there is minimal edge release of ions. I think the high flow rate is what contributes to even release of the ions across the entire surface of the electrodes. I may be wrong but so far I'm not in doubt. Anyway, the use of round wires is not an alternative and really isn't necessary since the generators work so well with flat electrodes. Why modify a good device? You have your ideas and that's fine but please stop knocking my generators without knowing the facts. I don't appreciate a self serving "expert engineer" coming along and telling people that my design and implementation is no good when in fact they are a very good product. In the years of manufacturing them I have not had one customer return one under our 30 day money back guarantee nor have I had one customer complain about yellowing which cannot be said of most of the other units available. Give me a break! Trem www.silvergen.com - Original Message - From: "Mike Monett" To: Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 10:51 AM Subject: Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m60147.html > Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > From: Trem > Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 09:30:35 > > > I test each SG7 individually by running a 1 1/2 gallon batch to > > assure the unit works properly before shipment. I also produce a > > batch every day or so to use around our household and also produce > > and give away as much as possible locally to those needing it. I > > conservatively estimate at least 500 gallons have been made using > > the test electrode which still looks original as far as shape is > > concerned. That is the edges of the electrodes (4) are not thin > > and sharp as you keep stating will be the fact. They started out > > at .013 inches and they are still that thickness as best I can > > measure. > > You are right. The effect is more likely to show up on the smaller > system, which uses 0.25" plates. It won't sharpen the edge, but > rather smooth it and also tend to reduce the width. But the plates > are too thin to show much of a "V" due to the edge effect. They wear > through too fast. > > The 1.5" plates on your production unit are much too wide to show > this effect, except you might see some rounding of the corners. > > I calculated the loss in thickness assuming you run at 15 ppm, and > found you may have lost about 2.4 thousandths of an inch in > thickness on the inner pair of plates. This is negligible compared > to the 1.5" width. The outer plates may have lost 1.2 mils, which > might be hard to measure. Th
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
Hi Tony, I got a bit more serious about measuring the thickness and discovered the 2 inner electrodes are actually about .008" and the outer ones are about .011" so the silver is leaving the electrodes. The problem with measuring is that they are so close to each other and they're also corrugated for rigidity that I cannot get the caliper in place. I cannot see or feel any porosity. Trem - Original Message - From: "Tony Moody" To: Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 7:21 AM Subject: Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > Trem, > Could it be that the process is mining into the the mass of silver, > corroding tunnels and cavities, while leaving the surface fairly intact? > This is classic in stainless steel where the bottom of the hole is > preferentially corroded, leading to disasterous cracks very quickly. This > usually happens close to welded areas and also in stressed areas. > Tony > > Trem wrote: > > Well this is really interesting. Since the electrodes have about 2.3 or > > a bit more ounces of usable silver and they are still there although > > reduced in thickness a bit and since I know the PPM is not .3 but 20 > > because of independent lab tests, there can be no explanation other than > > I was mistaken in the estimated quantity produced. > > > > See below for further comments. > > > > Trem > > > > -- > 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: silver-list@eskimo.com > > Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html > > List maintainer: Mike Devour > > > >
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
Trem, Could it be that the process is mining into the the mass of silver, corroding tunnels and cavities, while leaving the surface fairly intact? This is classic in stainless steel where the bottom of the hole is preferentially corroded, leading to disasterous cracks very quickly. This usually happens close to welded areas and also in stressed areas. Tony Trem wrote: Well this is really interesting. Since the electrodes have about 2.3 or a bit more ounces of usable silver and they are still there although reduced in thickness a bit and since I know the PPM is not .3 but 20 because of independent lab tests, there can be no explanation other than I was mistaken in the estimated quantity produced. See below for further comments. Trem -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. Instructions for unsubscribing may be found at: http://silverlist.org To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
the production light coming on immediately. I have it calibrated to come on somewhere in the 3 uS range. Under that and it stays off at startup. It then comes on as the water reaches that level during production and stays on until shutdown. It works as a water test light an in production light and an indicator of process completion. Works perfectly as a triple purpose light. A no brainer. This prevents you from seeding a new batch with some from a previous run. So you cannot speed the process if your distilled water is very good quality. NOT TRUE. See the previous answer. Once the first batch is done, one can seed the subsequent batches if they use water of known quality which is what was determined on the first batch. "SG5A inside view. This generator uses the same constant current regulator as the SG6 but does not have automatic shutoff, variable PPM control or the stirring motor. You run the unit for a given time to produce the strength in PPM you desire. It can make CS up to 15 PPM with no color. Higher concentrations can produce a yellow color CS because of agglomeration. This unit is identical to the SG5B but can not work with external DC voltages from 9 to 40 volts as the SG5B can." Although the cheaper model has no stirring motor, I think their approach to mount the unit on top of the water container is a bit risky. I'd be concerned about it tipping over and spilling water all over the place. You do not need water spills where electricity is involved. Also, the unit may fall to the floor and be damaged. What a ridiculous idea. The unit sits squarely centered on a jar of water. In fact it is a preferred method because the electrodes are automatically centered in the water and wetted depth is always the same if they fill the vessel to the same height each time. The overall design of the Silvergen is not as carefully thought out as the SilverPuppy. The price is $20 higher. You have to assemble the unit. The flat strips will be impossible to keep straight. Their calculations on electrode surface area are wrong and deceiving. Our design is much more sophisticated than the Silver Puppy (sorry Ken but we both know it's true.) Mike, you are the one deceiving the list members. Do you really think variable PPM control, stirring motor and auto shutoff are poor features. As I said earlier. Give me a break. Go attack someone else for a while. I'd go with the SilverPuppy. > url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m60182.html > Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > From: Trem > Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 18:08:47 > > > Hopefully you won't find something else to fault our units. I > > think they're the best ones available. Too bad you hadn't tried > > one before you started badmouthing them. > > Hi Trem, > > I really didn't know anyone made siver generators with flat electrodes > until you started posting. I am not badmouthing you or your product. Are you still sticking with your story of not badmouthing our generators.
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
Well this is really interesting. Since the electrodes have about 2.3 or a bit more ounces of usable silver and they are still there although reduced in thickness a bit and since I know the PPM is not .3 but 20 because of independent lab tests, there can be no explanation other than I was mistaken in the estimated quantity produced. See below for further comments. Trem - Original Message - From: "Mike Monett" To: Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2003 8:41 AM Subject: Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m60186.html > Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > From: Arnold Beland > Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 19:44:59 > > > 500 gallons X 8lbs X 16 = 64000 X .20 (ppm?) = 1.28 ounces of > > silver used. I should think that that amount of missing silver > > would be noticeable. Something wrong with my thinking here? Mass > > is Mass, correct? > > Hi Arnold, > > You are right. Forget about interleaved electrodes, polarity > switching and outward-facing elecrodes. They just mess up the > calculations. > > I get the following: > > lb = 8.34 * gal > = 8.34 * 500 > = 4170 > > oz = 16 * lb > = 16 * 4170 > = 66720 > > For 20 ppm, the silver weighs > > wt = oz * ppm > = 66720 * 20e-6 > = 1.3344 oz > > Now we run into problems with Troy oz vs avoirdupois. But I did find > a reference that states silver weighs 6.25 ounces per cubic inch. > > cuin = wt / 6.25 >= 1.3344 / 6.25 >= 0.2135 > > There are four plates 1.5" wide with 5" wetted depth. The face area > is > > area = n * width * depth >= 4 * 1.5 * 5 >= 30 sq. in. > > Volume is area * height. We know the volume, now let's get the > height. > > ht = cuin / area > = 0.2135 / 30 > = 0.00711 inch > = 7.11 mils > > That is more than half the original thickness of 13 mils. It should > be easy to measure. > > Here is a table of thickess loss vs ppm: > > 10 ppm = 3.55 mils > 5 ppm = 1.775 mils > 1 ppm = 0.355 mils > 0.3 ppm = 0.118 mils > > It should be possible to detect a .1 mil change in thickness, so the > ppm must be 0.3 ppm or less. > > However, the system has an automatic shutoff when the solution > reaches the desired ppm. > > I don't know how to design a comparator that would function reliably > at such low ppm levels. It is set to operate between 5 and 20 ppm as determined by voltage drop across the electrodes. > Perhaps it is triggered on a noise spike, such as turning on a > light, or a static discharge from walking across a carpet. This is a > common problem with comparators, especially when they are attached > to external wires that act as an antenna. The comparator is connected to the electrodes which are in water. Not much chance of external spikes being transmitted into water. > If this is the problem, the solution could be easy or very > difficult. It depends on how the pcb is layed out, and what kind of > rfi filtering is used. It's not a problem. The units are not triggered by static electricity unless one touches one of the electrodes when it is in open air and even then it is difficult to trigger. It requires a certain amount of resistance between electrodes to trigger. The generator circuit measures voltage drop across the resistance and compares it to the dial setting voltage. When they are the same the unit shuts off. > It should be possible to see if this is the problem by starting a > batch and turning on an ordinary electric drill nearby. If the > system shuts down immediately, suspect rfi getting into the > comparator. Doesn't do a thing. As stated above. Nothing shuts it down except the resistance in the water or the use of an external resistor for calibration purposes. Pretty much bulletproof in operation. > Troubleshooting these kinds of problems is very expensive. The > people who know how to do it charge for their talent. The equipment > that is needed can be very expensive. > > However, all the work I do with colloidal silver is free. I would be > happy to do it for nothing, if Trem would pay the shipping charges > and supply all needed documentation, including schematics and pcb > layout. Thanks for your offer but I don't need any troubleshooting help. This isn't rocket science. I'm capable of doing any necessary work. The units operate as designed. There isn't any problem. > Best Regards, > > Mike Monett > > > -- > 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: silver-list@eskimo.com > > Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html > > List maintainer: Mike Devour > > > >
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
Arnold Beland wrote: > 500 gallons X 8lbs X 16 = 64000 X .20 (ppm?) = 1.28 ounces of > silver used. I should think that that amount of missing silver would > be noticeable. Something wrong with my thinking here? Mass is Mass, > correct? > Without putting the units on the numbers, it took me a good while to figure out what you were trying to do. Yes. 500 gallons * 8 lbs/gallon * 16 oz/lbs = 64000 oz and a concentration of 20 ppm would be 1.28 ounces. Marshall > > - Original Message - > From: "Mike Monett" > To: > Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 7:07 PM > Subject: Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > > > url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m60182.html > > Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > > From: Trem > > Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 18:08:47 > > > > > Hopefully you won't find something else to fault our units. > I > > > think they're the best ones available. Too bad you hadn't > tried > > > one before you started badmouthing them. > > > > Hi Trem, > > > > I really didn't know anyone made siver generators with flat > electrodes > > until you started posting. I am not badmouthing you or your product. > The > > field configuration on parallel plates is well understood. For > example, > > please see > > > > "Electrostatic Boundary Value Problems" > > > > Many problems in ... ... above are each dependent on only > one > > variable. ... conductors (sharp edges) where electric field > fringing > > is seen ... > > > > www.ece.msstate.edu/~donohoe/ece3313notes6.pdf > > > > The advantage you have is you can insulate the edges and eliminate > the > > problem. This would make your system unbeatable. We do not have this > > priviledge in electronics. We have to put up with the effects, and > there > > is no way around it at high frequencies. > > > > Unfortunately, according to my calculations, the test electrodes you > are > > holding in your hand should have disappeared long ago. This is why I > > thought there was a problem with my calculation and why I changed > it: > > > > http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m60174.html > > > > But now I think my original calculation was correct. If your > electrodes > > are still visible, and they still have 0.013 inch thickness after > 500 > > gallons, your ppm must be very low. There is something wrong with > your > > system, and I am sorry to be the one to have discovered it. > > > > I would spend the time to do an accurate calculation, but I don't > think > > it is needed. > > > > If this is the depletion rate of your electrodes, and the rest of > your > > systems perform the same, you are at least an order of magnitude > off. > > > > This is the reason why your cs never turns yellow or plates out. But > it > > can be fixed easily. > > > > After going through the calculations, I am impressed with what a > system > > using parallel plates could achieve by using very low current > density and > > insulating the edges. > > > > I am currently looking for local suppliers for flat silver, since > > monsterslayer charges an exhorbitant rate to ship to Canada. I think > I > > have found a few, and will see what develops. > > > > I will post my findings, and I'm sure they will please you. I have > no > > interest in producing cs generators or trying to attract any > business in > > this area. I have other things much more challenging. > > > > Thank you for your time and interest. > > > > Best Regards, > > > > Mike Monett > > > > > > -- > > 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: silver-list@eskimo.com > > > > Silver-list archive: > http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html > > > > List maintainer: Mike Devour
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m60186.html Re: CS>$$$ perpectives From: Arnold Beland Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 19:44:59 > 500 gallons X 8lbs X 16 = 64000 X .20 (ppm?) = 1.28 ounces of > silver used. I should think that that amount of missing silver > would be noticeable. Something wrong with my thinking here? Mass > is Mass, correct? Hi Arnold, You are right. Forget about interleaved electrodes, polarity switching and outward-facing elecrodes. They just mess up the calculations. I get the following: lb = 8.34 * gal = 8.34 * 500 = 4170 oz = 16 * lb = 16 * 4170 = 66720 For 20 ppm, the silver weighs wt = oz * ppm = 66720 * 20e-6 = 1.3344 oz Now we run into problems with Troy oz vs avoirdupois. But I did find a reference that states silver weighs 6.25 ounces per cubic inch. cuin = wt / 6.25 = 1.3344 / 6.25 = 0.2135 There are four plates 1.5" wide with 5" wetted depth. The face area is area = n * width * depth = 4 * 1.5 * 5 = 30 sq. in. Volume is area * height. We know the volume, now let's get the height. ht = cuin / area = 0.2135 / 30 = 0.00711 inch = 7.11 mils That is more than half the original thickness of 13 mils. It should be easy to measure. Here is a table of thickess loss vs ppm: 10 ppm = 3.55 mils 5 ppm = 1.775 mils 1 ppm = 0.355 mils 0.3 ppm = 0.118 mils It should be possible to detect a .1 mil change in thickness, so the ppm must be 0.3 ppm or less. However, the system has an automatic shutoff when the solution reaches the desired ppm. I don't know how to design a comparator that would function reliably at such low ppm levels. Perhaps it is triggered on a noise spike, such as turning on a light, or a static discharge from walking across a carpet. This is a common problem with comparators, especially when they are attached to external wires that act as an antenna. If this is the problem, the solution could be easy or very difficult. It depends on how the pcb is layed out, and what kind of rfi filtering is used. It should be possible to see if this is the problem by starting a batch and turning on an ordinary electric drill nearby. If the system shuts down immediately, suspect rfi getting into the comparator. Troubleshooting these kinds of problems is very expensive. The people who know how to do it charge for their talent. The equipment that is needed can be very expensive. However, all the work I do with colloidal silver is free. I would be happy to do it for nothing, if Trem would pay the shipping charges and supply all needed documentation, including schematics and pcb layout. Best Regards, Mike Monett -- 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: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
Trem, Read my post again. I thought I made it clear that I never had or would wash any container used for CS. While I don't understand the technical discussions on production between those of you who have the background in that area, I do find it interesting. I'm sure that nothing but good can come from it. And a special word of praise to those who while they have no commercial interest in CS or any other health related matter, devote a lot of time giving good advise.Bob S. - Original Message - From: "Trem" To: Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 8:10 PM Subject: Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > Hi Bob, > > Whatever you (and all CS users) do, don't wash the vessel with a liquid > detergent. The detergent contains surfactants that will stick to the glass > and cause agglomeration. If you feel inclined it is OK to wash them in the > dishwasher because that soap doesn't have any surfactant. If you do use > liquid soap or detergent my recommendation is to toss the jar and start with > a new one. The CS will turn yellow until you get all the soap out of it. > > I have many customers that have had great success with MS using CS made with > our units. I could knock your socks off with some of the anecdotal stories. > And that's regarding many other maladies other than MS. > > I too want to see a generator in every household before the powers that be > close the window of self help. It's a long uphill road however since I now > see they are speeding up the disinformation campaign against us. > > Best regards, > > Trem > www.silvergen.com > > > ----- Original Message - > From: "bob smith" > To: > Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 5:32 PM > Subject: Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > > > > Trem, > > This is coming from someone who has no technical background and has no > > desire nor sees no need for my developing these skills. > > What is hard for me to understand is when others with backgrounds like > > mine make such a prodject out of what to me is a simple process.(fill a > jar > > with DW, attach generator, turn power on) The way to solve running too > long > > if their unit don't have auto shutoff would be to use a timer in the power > > line. > > I don't know why anyone would want to wash either their production jar > or > > the storage jars. Don't CS do a better (complete) job of disinfecting > than > > any soap or detergent? When I first started making CS I went to Mills > Fleet > > Farm and got a case(12) qt. jars which come with lids for $7.89. I have > > several beneficiaries of my production. When they got their first jars > full, > > I threatened them with excommunication and worse if they were to wash a > jar. > > It must not be doing any harm because my neighbor has MS. At the time he > > started on CS symptoms of this affliction were showing up. Last week when > he > > stopped in for a refill, he was euphoric, saying that all the symptoms > were > > gone and that his energy level was what he felt it should be. My youngest > > daughter says it is the best nasal spray she has ever used. I'm not going > to > > mention what it's done for me. > > Several of the list authorities on this process have at one time or the > > other stated that just about any type of equipment or pure silver > electrodes > > along with good quality DS (which isn't hard to find, unless you want to > > have something to talk about) will make a good product. This I believe. > > I myself have a silvergen SG6. I have made close to 50 gal. There has > > never been a trace of color in any batch. I accidently used a gal. of > > drinking water for one batch. That was the only bad batch. > >As far as the silver electrodes wearing, I can barely detect a little > > weakness in one, and that is after about 50 gal. When it gets where I > think > > it could be a problem, I intend to switch them. This should make the > silver > > electrode cost about 10 cents a gal. What's the point in trying to beat > > that? > > There are apparently 2 or more mfg. of generators who contribute to the > > list. I'm sure they all do a creditable job. It is my sincere wish that > > they are all blessed with an abundance of business, until every household > is > > equiped with one. With what is looming on the horizon, the more who are > > using CS the better. While on that thought, I am going to mention > something > > that came up last week. My oldest daughter has a friend who makes a line > of > > supplements. His hottest item is ionized silver. She told him a
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
500 gallons X 8lbs X 16 = 64000 X .20 (ppm?) = 1.28 ounces of silver used. I should think that that amount of missing silver would be noticeable. Something wrong with my thinking here? Mass is Mass, correct? - Original Message - From: "Mike Monett" To: Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 7:07 PM Subject: Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m60182.html > Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > From: Trem > Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 18:08:47 > > > Hopefully you won't find something else to fault our units. I > > think they're the best ones available. Too bad you hadn't tried > > one before you started badmouthing them. > > Hi Trem, > > I really didn't know anyone made siver generators with flat electrodes > until you started posting. I am not badmouthing you or your product. The > field configuration on parallel plates is well understood. For example, > please see > > "Electrostatic Boundary Value Problems" > > Many problems in ... ... above are each dependent on only one > variable. ... conductors (sharp edges) where electric field fringing > is seen ... > > www.ece.msstate.edu/~donohoe/ece3313notes6.pdf > > The advantage you have is you can insulate the edges and eliminate the > problem. This would make your system unbeatable. We do not have this > priviledge in electronics. We have to put up with the effects, and there > is no way around it at high frequencies. > > Unfortunately, according to my calculations, the test electrodes you are > holding in your hand should have disappeared long ago. This is why I > thought there was a problem with my calculation and why I changed it: > > http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m60174.html > > But now I think my original calculation was correct. If your electrodes > are still visible, and they still have 0.013 inch thickness after 500 > gallons, your ppm must be very low. There is something wrong with your > system, and I am sorry to be the one to have discovered it. > > I would spend the time to do an accurate calculation, but I don't think > it is needed. > > If this is the depletion rate of your electrodes, and the rest of your > systems perform the same, you are at least an order of magnitude off. > > This is the reason why your cs never turns yellow or plates out. But it > can be fixed easily. > > After going through the calculations, I am impressed with what a system > using parallel plates could achieve by using very low current density and > insulating the edges. > > I am currently looking for local suppliers for flat silver, since > monsterslayer charges an exhorbitant rate to ship to Canada. I think I > have found a few, and will see what develops. > > I will post my findings, and I'm sure they will please you. I have no > interest in producing cs generators or trying to attract any business in > this area. I have other things much more challenging. > > Thank you for your time and interest. > > Best Regards, > > Mike Monett > > > -- > 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: silver-list@eskimo.com > > Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html > > List maintainer: Mike Devour
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m60182.html Re: CS>$$$ perpectives From: Trem Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 18:08:47 > Hopefully you won't find something else to fault our units. I > think they're the best ones available. Too bad you hadn't tried > one before you started badmouthing them. Hi Trem, I really didn't know anyone made siver generators with flat electrodes until you started posting. I am not badmouthing you or your product. The field configuration on parallel plates is well understood. For example, please see "Electrostatic Boundary Value Problems" Many problems in ... ... above are each dependent on only one variable. ... conductors (sharp edges) where electric field fringing is seen ... www.ece.msstate.edu/~donohoe/ece3313notes6.pdf The advantage you have is you can insulate the edges and eliminate the problem. This would make your system unbeatable. We do not have this priviledge in electronics. We have to put up with the effects, and there is no way around it at high frequencies. Unfortunately, according to my calculations, the test electrodes you are holding in your hand should have disappeared long ago. This is why I thought there was a problem with my calculation and why I changed it: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m60174.html But now I think my original calculation was correct. If your electrodes are still visible, and they still have 0.013 inch thickness after 500 gallons, your ppm must be very low. There is something wrong with your system, and I am sorry to be the one to have discovered it. I would spend the time to do an accurate calculation, but I don't think it is needed. If this is the depletion rate of your electrodes, and the rest of your systems perform the same, you are at least an order of magnitude off. This is the reason why your cs never turns yellow or plates out. But it can be fixed easily. After going through the calculations, I am impressed with what a system using parallel plates could achieve by using very low current density and insulating the edges. I am currently looking for local suppliers for flat silver, since monsterslayer charges an exhorbitant rate to ship to Canada. I think I have found a few, and will see what develops. I will post my findings, and I'm sure they will please you. I have no interest in producing cs generators or trying to attract any business in this area. I have other things much more challenging. Thank you for your time and interest. Best Regards, Mike Monett -- 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: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
bob smith I just want to say, YOU are right, I make my own CS without the bells, I use an 15Vdc power supply from a went south scanner to two #12 . wires of silver, I use a Hanna PWT to check (calibrated the HI 7033 calibration solution) I haven't had one bad batch yet. I love all the talk from Trem and Mike and all the others, But man it is all good, If you are going to sale it then you need to read all this, If you are just going to use it, Then it is all good, you don't need to sale your produce so just make it and forget the sales talk they are doing. Sincerely Yours, Hank http://hdka.stormpages.com/indexf.html http://www.babelmagazine.com/wing.html http://members.myecom.net/hdka/ct/ct.html - Original Message - From: bob smith To: silver-list@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 7:32 PM Subject: Re: CS>$$$ perpectives Trem, This is coming from someone who has no technical background and has no desire nor sees no need for my developing these skills. What is hard for me to understand is when others with backgrounds like mine make such a prodject out of what to me is a simple process.(fill a jar with DW, attach generator, turn power on) The way to solve running too long if their unit don't have auto shutoff would be to use a timer in the power line. I don't know why anyone would want to wash either their production jar or the storage jars. Don't CS do a better (complete) job of disinfecting than any soap or detergent? When I first started making CS I went to Mills Fleet Farm and got a case(12) qt. jars which come with lids for $7.89. I have several beneficiaries of my production. When they got their first jars full, I threatened them with excommunication and worse if they were to wash a jar. It must not be doing any harm because my neighbor has MS. At the time he started on CS symptoms of this affliction were showing up. Last week when he stopped in for a refill, he was euphoric, saying that all the symptoms were gone and that his energy level was what he felt it should be. My youngest daughter says it is the best nasal spray she has ever used. I'm not going to mention what it's done for me. Several of the list authorities on this process have at one time or the other stated that just about any type of equipment or pure silver electrodes along with good quality DS (which isn't hard to find, unless you want to have something to talk about) will make a good product. This I believe. I myself have a silvergen SG6. I have made close to 50 gal. There has never been a trace of color in any batch. I accidently used a gal. of drinking water for one batch. That was the only bad batch. As far as the silver electrodes wearing, I can barely detect a little weakness in one, and that is after about 50 gal. When it gets where I think it could be a problem, I intend to switch them. This should make the silver electrode cost about 10 cents a gal. What's the point in trying to beat that? There are apparently 2 or more mfg. of generators who contribute to the list. I'm sure they all do a creditable job. It is my sincere wish that they are all blessed with an abundance of business, until every household is equiped with one. With what is looming on the horizon, the more who are using CS the better. While on that thought, I am going to mention something that came up last week. My oldest daughter has a friend who makes a line of supplements. His hottest item is ionized silver. She told him about my making my own. He proved to be a short sighted fool by scaring the wits out of her with the turning blue B.S. I told her to tell him that he was helping to make the rope that the pharmaceutical/AMA people would hang him with. Penny wise and pound foolish. The title of the foregoing message is "The Gospel on CS According To Robert". R.E.S. - Original Message - From: "Trem" To: Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 2:29 PM Subject: Re: CS>$$$ perpectives --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.488 / Virus Database: 287 - Release Date: 6/5/03
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
Hi Bob, Whatever you (and all CS users) do, don't wash the vessel with a liquid detergent. The detergent contains surfactants that will stick to the glass and cause agglomeration. If you feel inclined it is OK to wash them in the dishwasher because that soap doesn't have any surfactant. If you do use liquid soap or detergent my recommendation is to toss the jar and start with a new one. The CS will turn yellow until you get all the soap out of it. I have many customers that have had great success with MS using CS made with our units. I could knock your socks off with some of the anecdotal stories. And that's regarding many other maladies other than MS. I too want to see a generator in every household before the powers that be close the window of self help. It's a long uphill road however since I now see they are speeding up the disinformation campaign against us. Best regards, Trem www.silvergen.com - Original Message - From: "bob smith" To: Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 5:32 PM Subject: Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > Trem, > This is coming from someone who has no technical background and has no > desire nor sees no need for my developing these skills. > What is hard for me to understand is when others with backgrounds like > mine make such a prodject out of what to me is a simple process.(fill a jar > with DW, attach generator, turn power on) The way to solve running too long > if their unit don't have auto shutoff would be to use a timer in the power > line. > I don't know why anyone would want to wash either their production jar or > the storage jars. Don't CS do a better (complete) job of disinfecting than > any soap or detergent? When I first started making CS I went to Mills Fleet > Farm and got a case(12) qt. jars which come with lids for $7.89. I have > several beneficiaries of my production. When they got their first jars full, > I threatened them with excommunication and worse if they were to wash a jar. > It must not be doing any harm because my neighbor has MS. At the time he > started on CS symptoms of this affliction were showing up. Last week when he > stopped in for a refill, he was euphoric, saying that all the symptoms were > gone and that his energy level was what he felt it should be. My youngest > daughter says it is the best nasal spray she has ever used. I'm not going to > mention what it's done for me. > Several of the list authorities on this process have at one time or the > other stated that just about any type of equipment or pure silver electrodes > along with good quality DS (which isn't hard to find, unless you want to > have something to talk about) will make a good product. This I believe. > I myself have a silvergen SG6. I have made close to 50 gal. There has > never been a trace of color in any batch. I accidently used a gal. of > drinking water for one batch. That was the only bad batch. >As far as the silver electrodes wearing, I can barely detect a little > weakness in one, and that is after about 50 gal. When it gets where I think > it could be a problem, I intend to switch them. This should make the silver > electrode cost about 10 cents a gal. What's the point in trying to beat > that? > There are apparently 2 or more mfg. of generators who contribute to the > list. I'm sure they all do a creditable job. It is my sincere wish that > they are all blessed with an abundance of business, until every household is > equiped with one. With what is looming on the horizon, the more who are > using CS the better. While on that thought, I am going to mention something > that came up last week. My oldest daughter has a friend who makes a line of > supplements. His hottest item is ionized silver. She told him about my > making my own. He proved to be a short sighted fool by scaring the wits out > of her with the turning blue B.S. I told her to tell him that he was helping > to make the rope that the pharmaceutical/AMA people would hang him with. > Penny wise and pound foolish. > The title of the foregoing message is "The Gospel on CS According To > Robert". R.E.S. -- 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: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
Mike, No, it's just that I'm using a dial caliper and it's really hard to get a good reading because of the corrugations. Obviously it is now thinner but since the degradation appears to be evenly distributed between all the electrodes I suspect it will be some time before I can see any significant measurable change. Trem - Original Message - From: "Mike Monett" To: Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 2:03 PM Subject: Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m60147.html > Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > From: Trem > Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 09:30:35 > > > I test each SG7 individually by running a 1 1/2 gallon batch to > > assure the unit works properly before shipment. > > > I also produce a batch every day or so to use around our household > > and also produce and give away as much as possible locally to > > those needing it. > > > I conservatively estimate at least 500 gallons have been made > > using the test electrode which still looks original as far as > > shape is concerned. > > > That is the edges of the electrodes (4) are not thin and sharp as > > you keep stating will be the fact. They started out at .013 inches > > and they are still that thickness as best I can measure. > > Trem, > > Something is wrong. If the electrodes started out at 0.013 inches, > and you processed 500 gallons and they are still 0.013 inch, how > much silver was deposited in the dw? > > Am I misunderstanding what you are saying? > > Best Regards, > > Mike Monett > > > -- > The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. > > Instructions for unsubscribing may be found at: http://silverlist.org > > To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com > > Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html > > List maintainer: Mike Devour > > > >
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
Mike, Yes, like most others I started off with constant voltage/no current limiting many years ago and immediately found that it was not repeatable. I spent some time working empirically using current limiting, no additives, various surface areas and run times before coming out with the first generator...the SG3. It had no shutoff, did not stir and used a cable to connect to the electrodes. That's basically the same as the SG5 we still sell. I always try to talk a person into the SG6 if possible because I know it has all the bells and whistles. But anyway, I found the ideal surface area to current density and have stuck with it. It works well so no need to further experiment. If it aint broke...don't fix it. Current limiting starts very quickly because of the close proximity of the electrodes to each other. It is regulating within a few minutes. Your statement that it is prone to making particles doesn't jibe. Our mix is typically 85% ionic. I don't think 15% particulate is out of reason. In fact I like to see some particles in the mix since I'm not completely sure they don't work. And as I have said many times...the particles are SMALL and do not agglomerate. And lastly, our units are highly repeatable from batch to batch so as far as I'm concerned further testing to determine strength is a moot point. Been there...done that using AA. I just received an email from a customer that is making 5 gallons a day and doing it 7 days a week. She says the electrodes are still the same shape and the water never turns color. She said it would be OK to put the post on list but since it's a testimonial I'm not comfortable doing so because it might appear to be too commercial, although I do see many folks touting their favorite generators on list. Want to see the testimonial? Hopefully you won't find something else to fault our units. I think they're the best ones available. Too bad you hadn't tried one before you started badmouthing them. Trem www.silvergen.com - Original Message - From: "Mike Monett" To: Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 1:32 PM Subject: Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m60176.html > Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > From: Trem > Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 12:31:40 > > Hi Trem, > > Thanks for taking the time to carefully review my post. I know we all > started using the same kind of system, so everyone is used to the same > result. But I was very surprised to find what happens at much lower > current density. > > When does your system go into current limiting? > > At 30 ma and 22.5 sq. in. you are running at 30/22.5 = 1.33 mA/ sq. in. > That is very close to what I used to use. > > So your process maintains a fairly high voltage across the cell for much > of the brew time, and the current limiting doesn't start right away. > > These are ideal conditions for the formation of particles. Running at > much lower current density (~100uA/sq. in) doesn't produce them for the > same number of Coulombs transferred. > > But until we can get a good handle on measuring ppm consistently, this > won't mean much to you. > > Best Regards, > > Mike Monett > > > -- > 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: silver-list@eskimo.com > > Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html > > List maintainer: Mike Devour > > > >
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
At 12:51 PM 6/13/03, you wrote: You are right. The effect is more likely to show up on the smaller system, which uses 0.25" plates. It won't sharpen the edge, but rather smooth it and also tend to reduce the width. But the plates are too thin to show much of a "V" due to the edge effect. They wear through too fast. Mike, True there is going to be some edge effect. But thats not the bulk of the current. When you place 2 flat conductors next to each other with an insulator in between you have a capacitor. And the electrostatic field covers the entire surface of both conductors connecting them with a constant supply of ions being generated between them. With the mechanical stirring sweeping the ions away as soon as they are formed. This method allows for a highly ionic solution to be made quickly. The beauty of using plates as your electrodes is the electrostatic field is larger because more surface area is aligned. +- Bentonite Clay for sale-+ http://pages.sbcglobal.net/davebe/clay.html ¦ David Bearrow ¦ ¦ dav...@sbcglobal.net ¦ + Phone: (972)722-8319 + -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. Instructions for unsubscribing may be found at: http://silverlist.org To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
Trem, This is coming from someone who has no technical background and has no desire nor sees no need for my developing these skills. What is hard for me to understand is when others with backgrounds like mine make such a prodject out of what to me is a simple process.(fill a jar with DW, attach generator, turn power on) The way to solve running too long if their unit don't have auto shutoff would be to use a timer in the power line. I don't know why anyone would want to wash either their production jar or the storage jars. Don't CS do a better (complete) job of disinfecting than any soap or detergent? When I first started making CS I went to Mills Fleet Farm and got a case(12) qt. jars which come with lids for $7.89. I have several beneficiaries of my production. When they got their first jars full, I threatened them with excommunication and worse if they were to wash a jar. It must not be doing any harm because my neighbor has MS. At the time he started on CS symptoms of this affliction were showing up. Last week when he stopped in for a refill, he was euphoric, saying that all the symptoms were gone and that his energy level was what he felt it should be. My youngest daughter says it is the best nasal spray she has ever used. I'm not going to mention what it's done for me. Several of the list authorities on this process have at one time or the other stated that just about any type of equipment or pure silver electrodes along with good quality DS (which isn't hard to find, unless you want to have something to talk about) will make a good product. This I believe. I myself have a silvergen SG6. I have made close to 50 gal. There has never been a trace of color in any batch. I accidently used a gal. of drinking water for one batch. That was the only bad batch. As far as the silver electrodes wearing, I can barely detect a little weakness in one, and that is after about 50 gal. When it gets where I think it could be a problem, I intend to switch them. This should make the silver electrode cost about 10 cents a gal. What's the point in trying to beat that? There are apparently 2 or more mfg. of generators who contribute to the list. I'm sure they all do a creditable job. It is my sincere wish that they are all blessed with an abundance of business, until every household is equiped with one. With what is looming on the horizon, the more who are using CS the better. While on that thought, I am going to mention something that came up last week. My oldest daughter has a friend who makes a line of supplements. His hottest item is ionized silver. She told him about my making my own. He proved to be a short sighted fool by scaring the wits out of her with the turning blue B.S. I told her to tell him that he was helping to make the rope that the pharmaceutical/AMA people would hang him with. Penny wise and pound foolish. The title of the foregoing message is "The Gospel on CS According To Robert". R.E.S. - Original Message - From: "Trem" To: Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 2:29 PM Subject: Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > Mike, > > I guess the reason for stirring is because I use higher current density > because of the close electrode spacing on our high speed units and that > absolutely requires it. The combination of the two speeds the process > dramatically and that's what I was after when designing the unit. Most > people want to make a good product and at the same time not wait a long time > for the process to be done. I've accomplished that and am very pleased with > the results as attested to by the fact that the CS never agglomerates (see > the electron microscope photos) and is highly ionic. What more would one > want than speed of production, ease of use, automatic shutoff and a good > product? I'm not about to change the design just because someone says the > electrodes will not blacken if I use much lower current and don't stir. > That would also require increasing electrode spacing dramatically since I > use one half inch spacing. > > I think you're not considering the water flow is vigorous enough there is > minimal edge release of ions. I think the high flow rate is what > contributes to even release of the ions across the entire surface of the > electrodes. I may be wrong but so far I'm not in doubt. > > Anyway, the use of round wires is not an alternative and really isn't > necessary since the generators work so well with flat electrodes. Why > modify a good device? > > You have your ideas and that's fine but please stop knocking my generators > without knowing the facts. I don't appreciate a self serving "expert > engineer" coming along and telling people that my design and implementation > is no good when in fact they are a very good product. In the
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m60147.html Re: CS>$$$ perpectives From: Trem Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 09:30:35 > I test each SG7 individually by running a 1 1/2 gallon batch to > assure the unit works properly before shipment. > I also produce a batch every day or so to use around our household > and also produce and give away as much as possible locally to > those needing it. > I conservatively estimate at least 500 gallons have been made > using the test electrode which still looks original as far as > shape is concerned. > That is the edges of the electrodes (4) are not thin and sharp as > you keep stating will be the fact. They started out at .013 inches > and they are still that thickness as best I can measure. Trem, Something is wrong. If the electrodes started out at 0.013 inches, and you processed 500 gallons and they are still 0.013 inch, how much silver was deposited in the dw? Am I misunderstanding what you are saying? Best Regards, Mike Monett -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. Instructions for unsubscribing may be found at: http://silverlist.org To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
What do you guys have against particles? It might just be that they do the "heavy lifting". Hey Frank, where are you when I need you? Let the game begin. - Original Message - From: "Mike Monett" To: Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 1:32 PM Subject: Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m60176.html > Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > From: Trem > Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 12:31:40 > > Hi Trem, > > Thanks for taking the time to carefully review my post. I know we all > started using the same kind of system, so everyone is used to the same > result. But I was very surprised to find what happens at much lower > current density. > > When does your system go into current limiting? > > At 30 ma and 22.5 sq. in. you are running at 30/22.5 = 1.33 mA/ sq. in. > That is very close to what I used to use. > > So your process maintains a fairly high voltage across the cell for much > of the brew time, and the current limiting doesn't start right away. > > These are ideal conditions for the formation of particles. Running at > much lower current density (~100uA/sq. in) doesn't produce them for the > same number of Coulombs transferred. > > But until we can get a good handle on measuring ppm consistently, this > won't mean much to you. > > Best Regards, > > Mike Monett > > > -- > 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: silver-list@eskimo.com > > Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html > > List maintainer: Mike Devour
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m60176.html Re: CS>$$$ perpectives From: Trem Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 12:31:40 Hi Trem, Thanks for taking the time to carefully review my post. I know we all started using the same kind of system, so everyone is used to the same result. But I was very surprised to find what happens at much lower current density. When does your system go into current limiting? At 30 ma and 22.5 sq. in. you are running at 30/22.5 = 1.33 mA/ sq. in. That is very close to what I used to use. So your process maintains a fairly high voltage across the cell for much of the brew time, and the current limiting doesn't start right away. These are ideal conditions for the formation of particles. Running at much lower current density (~100uA/sq. in) doesn't produce them for the same number of Coulombs transferred. But until we can get a good handle on measuring ppm consistently, this won't mean much to you. Best Regards, Mike Monett -- 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: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
Mike, I guess the reason for stirring is because I use higher current density because of the close electrode spacing on our high speed units and that absolutely requires it. The combination of the two speeds the process dramatically and that's what I was after when designing the unit. Most people want to make a good product and at the same time not wait a long time for the process to be done. I've accomplished that and am very pleased with the results as attested to by the fact that the CS never agglomerates (see the electron microscope photos) and is highly ionic. What more would one want than speed of production, ease of use, automatic shutoff and a good product? I'm not about to change the design just because someone says the electrodes will not blacken if I use much lower current and don't stir. That would also require increasing electrode spacing dramatically since I use one half inch spacing. I think you're not considering the water flow is vigorous enough there is minimal edge release of ions. I think the high flow rate is what contributes to even release of the ions across the entire surface of the electrodes. I may be wrong but so far I'm not in doubt. Anyway, the use of round wires is not an alternative and really isn't necessary since the generators work so well with flat electrodes. Why modify a good device? You have your ideas and that's fine but please stop knocking my generators without knowing the facts. I don't appreciate a self serving "expert engineer" coming along and telling people that my design and implementation is no good when in fact they are a very good product. In the years of manufacturing them I have not had one customer return one under our 30 day money back guarantee nor have I had one customer complain about yellowing which cannot be said of most of the other units available. Give me a break! Trem www.silvergen.com - Original Message - From: "Mike Monett" To: Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 10:51 AM Subject: Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m60147.html > Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > From: Trem > Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 09:30:35 > > > I test each SG7 individually by running a 1 1/2 gallon batch to > > assure the unit works properly before shipment. I also produce a > > batch every day or so to use around our household and also produce > > and give away as much as possible locally to those needing it. I > > conservatively estimate at least 500 gallons have been made using > > the test electrode which still looks original as far as shape is > > concerned. That is the edges of the electrodes (4) are not thin > > and sharp as you keep stating will be the fact. They started out > > at .013 inches and they are still that thickness as best I can > > measure. > > You are right. The effect is more likely to show up on the smaller > system, which uses 0.25" plates. It won't sharpen the edge, but > rather smooth it and also tend to reduce the width. But the plates > are too thin to show much of a "V" due to the edge effect. They wear > through too fast. > > The 1.5" plates on your production unit are much too wide to show > this effect, except you might see some rounding of the corners. > > I calculated the loss in thickness assuming you run at 15 ppm, and > found you may have lost about 2.4 thousandths of an inch in > thickness on the inner pair of plates. This is negligible compared > to the 1.5" width. The outer plates may have lost 1.2 mils, which > might be hard to measure. This assumes no silver is lost on the > outward-facing sides. > > But the edge effect shows where the current density is the highest. > If you shut off the stirring, you should to see misting occur first > at the edges of the cathode, then spread to the rest of the > electrode. Misting is a sign of particle generation, which tends to > limit the maximum ion concentration. > > I have not had much success using stirring to prevent this. I get > strange side effects, such as the cs is not a strong as it should be > according to the number of Coulombs transferred. It is not as > effective as without stirring, and one sample coalesced and formed a > small silver lump at the bottom of the glass when it was placed in a > refrigerator. So I have abandoned stirring. > > The significance of the edge effect is if you want to run below the > misting level, you have to reduce the current below the value you > could reach with round wires. > > However, you could insulate the edges as Ole Bob has done, and your > production unit
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m60173.html Re: CS>$$$ perpectives From: Mike Monett Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 10:52:55 I think I goofed at the step calculating the amount of silver lost per side: Calculate thickness per side. ea = th / 3 = 7.2 / 3 = 2.4 mils The 50% duty cycle and arrangement of the plates has tripped me up several times. I thought I had it right, but now I'm not so sure. This is a tricky calculation! Best Regards, Mike Monett -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. Instructions for unsubscribing may be found at: http://silverlist.org To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m60147.html Re: CS>$$$ perpectives From: Trem Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 09:30:35 > I test each SG7 individually by running a 1 1/2 gallon batch to > assure the unit works properly before shipment. I also produce a > batch every day or so to use around our household and also produce > and give away as much as possible locally to those needing it. I > conservatively estimate at least 500 gallons have been made using > the test electrode which still looks original as far as shape is > concerned. That is the edges of the electrodes (4) are not thin > and sharp as you keep stating will be the fact. They started out > at .013 inches and they are still that thickness as best I can > measure. You are right. The effect is more likely to show up on the smaller system, which uses 0.25" plates. It won't sharpen the edge, but rather smooth it and also tend to reduce the width. But the plates are too thin to show much of a "V" due to the edge effect. They wear through too fast. The 1.5" plates on your production unit are much too wide to show this effect, except you might see some rounding of the corners. I calculated the loss in thickness assuming you run at 15 ppm, and found you may have lost about 2.4 thousandths of an inch in thickness on the inner pair of plates. This is negligible compared to the 1.5" width. The outer plates may have lost 1.2 mils, which might be hard to measure. This assumes no silver is lost on the outward-facing sides. But the edge effect shows where the current density is the highest. If you shut off the stirring, you should to see misting occur first at the edges of the cathode, then spread to the rest of the electrode. Misting is a sign of particle generation, which tends to limit the maximum ion concentration. I have not had much success using stirring to prevent this. I get strange side effects, such as the cs is not a strong as it should be according to the number of Coulombs transferred. It is not as effective as without stirring, and one sample coalesced and formed a small silver lump at the bottom of the glass when it was placed in a refrigerator. So I have abandoned stirring. The significance of the edge effect is if you want to run below the misting level, you have to reduce the current below the value you could reach with round wires. However, you could insulate the edges as Ole Bob has done, and your production unit might be an unbeatable system, especially if you added more plates - they are cheap and you have plenty of room. I don't know if the large plates would block the dispersal and lead to higher ion concentration, which could lead to misting. The advantage of round wires is the space between the wires promotes even dispersal of the ions without the need for stirring. Reversing the polarity might delay the onset of misting. This needs to be examined separately, but if so, it could also be applied to round wires. > And please don't tell me the ions made with your process are > better than those made with mine. I don't believe it. Heh - you must be used to dealing with kooks. I never said that or implied it anywhere. I also don't believe that solar flares or the phase of the moon has any effect on cs production. An ion is an ion. > So once again I ask the question...why would one want to watch and > wait for what would be an interminable amount of time for the > product to be ready to use in order to keep the electrode clean > when one can make it as fast as 2 gallons per hour and have a > little residue which resides in the bottom of the vessel? With a given volume of dw, the ppm is determined by the number of Coulombs transferred. With constant current, the time is easily calculated according to the number of Coulombs needed. The real difference is that running at low current densities such as 100 uA/sq. in. produces no black crud. You can deposit more Coulombs in the solution without running into misting. The electrodes stay clean. Stirring is not needed, and the cs stays clear. This means there are more silver ions in the water and available to kill germs and virus. I believe this is why it is much more effective than the stuff I used to make at 1.4 mA/sq. in. Best Regards, Mike Monett Appendix - Calculation of thickness lost on parallel plates Convert 500 gallons to litres: lt = 3.785 * gal = 3.785 * 500 = 1892.5 litres Calculate weight of silver assuming 15 ppm. ppm = mg / lt ; parts per million mg = ppm * lt = 15 * 189
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
Mike, There is no mention of a lot of black crud on our website. What is said is this. "The particles of elemental silver which are continually being removed from the self cleaning electrodes during production will normally fall to the bottom of the vessel after the pump is turned off. Once those particles have settled, you may start the draining process." I call this truth in advertising. I do not want to have anyone think there is no residue since in fact there is. But it is an inconsequential amount. I test each SG7 individually by running a 1 1/2 gallon batch to assure the unit works properly before shipment. I also produce a batch every day or so to use around our household and also produce and give away as much as possible locally to those needing it. I conservatively estimate at least 500 gallons have been made using the test electrode which still looks original as far as shape is concerned. That is the edges of the electrodes (4) are not thin and sharp as you keep stating will be the fact. They started out at .013 inches and they are still that thickness as best I can measure. I have never cleaned the vessel either so I am able to easily see what is in the bottom of the vessel. There are a few metallic sparkling particles in the bottom and the container is discolored gray and has a ring around the upper part resembling a dark bathtub ring. The main purpose of polarity reversal is to even the deterioration and to clean any oxide or elemental silver that is attracted to the cathodes during the half cycles. Admittedly there is some oxide as evidenced by the gray vessel but to say there would be a waste of silver by allowing current density to be high enough to allow it is about as ridiculous an argument as I can think of. It's comparable to picking a small amount of fly poop out of the pepper. Who cares! It is inconsequential. I have never cleaned the vessel since any heavy particles are in the bottom and do not drain out and any oxide which is on the sides and bottom does not move either. If I were to scrape it all out I doubt there would be enough to easily measure. It is a non issue. I measured the thickness of the electrodes near the edge using a dial caliper and cannot measure any difference than a bit further in from the edge. It appears to me that with circulation the electrodes are letting the silver be released from the central portion at the same rate as from the edges. It may be true that without circulation an electrode may wear out from the edge inward but that is not my experience with the SG7. The SG6 uses much slower water circulation and the electrodes are only 1/4" wide so I do notice the lower corners do deteriorate and become rounded but I also notice they become very thin at the same time. I do not believe they are only deteriorating from the edges inward. What counts in my mind is this. The ability to produce a highly ionic product with small particulate silver component. As attested by the electron microscope photos the particles are indeed very small. As far as the ions are concerned I'm sure they aren't any different than those made using your lower current density device. So once again I ask the question...why would one want to watch and wait for what would be an interminable amount of time for the product to be ready to use in order to keep the electrode clean when one can make it as fast as 2 gallons per hour and have a little residue which resides in the bottom of the vessel? What I do is use one half inch spacing between the electrodes and with 30 milliamps of current flowing. One can see there is a very high current gradient in the water. If the water were not circulated the particles would agglomerate very easily but with vigorous circulation the ions are moved so rapidly away from that zone they do not do so. Your statement of time and money wasted certainly does not apply to my method. It applies to yours instead. Talk about time wasted. I suggest you try higher current density and moving the water if you don't want to waste time. And please don't tell me the ions made with your process are better than those made with mine. I don't believe it. Regards, Trem www.silvergen.com - Original Message - From: "Mike Monett" To: Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 3:06 PM Subject: Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m60040.html > Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > From: Trem > Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 14:21:39 > > > Mike, > > > See below. > > Trem, > > Thank you for your kind response. > > I would be interested to hear your comments on my main thesis, which > is the high current density at the edges of flat plates promotes the > generation of particles. > > Your web site indicates your production unit makes a great deal of > black crud, but you reverse the po
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m60040.html Re: CS>$$$ perpectives From: Trem Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 14:21:39 > Mike, > See below. Trem, Thank you for your kind response. I would be interested to hear your comments on my main thesis, which is the high current density at the edges of flat plates promotes the generation of particles. Your web site indicates your production unit makes a great deal of black crud, but you reverse the polarity so it falls to the bottom of the container. This is obviously time and money wasted. With round wire, a current density of 300 uA per square inch or less generates very little black crud for the same number of Coulombs transferred. I'd be interested to see if you can match this performance with flat plates. Best Regards, Mike Monett -- 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: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
All I said that was that both generators make excellent CS. One is not better than the other as you had said. The small one just makes less..not worse. In your case laying out $500 was probably justified but you inferred that others who buy smaller generators that work the same way and did not want to lay out the big bucks were getting shafted with low quality and it's just not true. Whether or not your expenditure was justifiable to you is no one elses business till you made it their business..which is what you did. Then you went off with an 'I'm more special, generous and caring than anyone else' trip. Why? Because you paid the big bucks rather than slaving in your kitchen like most people who don't have big bucks? The fact of the matter is that many ..even most...people who do have smaller generators do run them nearly 24/7 and give CS away to everyone they know. Ode At 12:02 PM 6/10/2003 -0400, you wrote: I think your below comment was unjustified, but then you may not share your C.S. production ability with friends... I happen to be watching several cancer patients get well from ingestion of C.S. Simply Stated, I'd be in the kitchen brewing the stuff (24/7) if I did not have a SG-7 model. A lot of people become very selfish, when they discover medical techniques that truly work. They try to take the knowledge and hide it away (for their use only) Pessimism & Selfishness are not the way to handle medicine. I also encourage you not to follow the selfish path Ode. Free Society will certainly parish without this most basic form of courage... Regards, Alexander - Original Message - From: "Ode Coyote" To: Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 9:03 AM Subject: Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > No, it's because you didn't lay out $500 , therefore having the need to > feel it was justified when 'you' only need a small amount. > > Both make very high quality CS and work essentially the same way on the > same principles. Scale is expensive and presents expensive problems to > design around. Small is easier to handle. > Ode > > At 03:11 PM 6/9/2003 -0500, you wrote: > >My CS is low grade simply because I have a small generator?? Ruth > >- Original Message - > >From: <mailto:carpae.d...@cox.net>carpae.d...@cox.net > >To: <mailto:silver-list@eskimo.com>silver-list@eskimo.com > >Cc: <mailto:carpae.d...@cox.net>carpae.d...@cox.net > >Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 2:55 PM > >Subject: CS>$$$ perpectives > > > >Hello All :) > > > >1-pack cigarettses=$5.00 x 2 x 7 = $70.00 per week... > >1-tank high-test <mailto:gasoli...@$1.80>gasoli...@$1.80 x 15 x 2 = $54.00 > >per week... > >1-family (of 4) outing at the movies = @ $50.00... > >1 PWT meter should be very affordable if it's value is traded > > against these luxery commodities, over the course of just one > > calendar week > > > >If that's not good enough, then consider the Emergency Room treatment of > >just one severe case of the flu... @ $150.00+ and that dose not even > >include the cost of expensive medications/antibiotics... > > > >That's how I justified going out and dropping $500.00 on a Silvergen > >SG-7 pro C.S. generator... It makes 5 gallons of extremely high grade > >C.S., in the time that a little unit makes a cup full of low grade C.S. > >Also, in the advent of a major Bio-Attack, my friends and family will have > >a liberal supply at all times... I'm prior service, and have a little > >knowledge of how terrorism operates... SARS was & is probably just a test > >of how the real (probably soon to be released ) killer bio-weapon pathogen > >will spread. They are studying The SARS Pattern, and analyzing the spread > >pattern... Also the true > >Bio-weapon is probably a strain of something that is based on resistance > >to what was observed to be practicable on a mass treatment scale by the > >U.S. & Canada... However, If you have a C.S. generator & even better the > >entire set of E.M. devices that go with the Dr. Robert Beck protocol... > >Then rest easy, you will be just fine... Just do not plan on being able to > >buy C.S. through the mail, once the real Bio-weapon is deployed... The > >U.S.P.S. will be under quarantine and shut down... When I was 16 the house > >next door was blown up by soviet terrorist... They planted 2 bombs... A > >little one to get every ones attention, and a bigger one to kill the > >curious people that would naturally try to start inspecting the > >ruins @ an hour later... SARS is probably modified G.W.I. > >(microplasma-fermentiens (incognitos-strain)), that Sadam shot at our > &g
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
I use rectangular electrodes 1/4" X 4" wet area and they wear evenly. They get thinner and thinner over time, yet they retain their 1/4" width. This leads me to believe that the current density is uniform throughout the electrode and not just at the edge. At 09:04 AM 6/10/03, Mike Monett wrote: As you point out, the key would be to find the wear pattern. If the thickness diminishes evenly, it may be a good idea. If it simply wears from the bottom, then it is no better than cut rods. As you mentioned some time ago, your rods using round wire with a "U" at the bottom wear evenly. This is a good indication of uniform current density and low particle generation. +- Bentonite Clay for sale-+ http://pages.sbcglobal.net/davebe/clay.html ¦ David Bearrow ¦ ¦ dav...@sbcglobal.net ¦ + Phone: (972)722-8319 + -- 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: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
Mike, See below. - Original Message - From: "Mike Monett" To: Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 5:38 PM Subject: Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m59988.html > Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > From: Trem > Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 16:22:08 > > > Hi Mike, > > > I've been hearing you knock flat silver electrodes for some time > > now and think it's about time to say something. I'm SilverGen. Our > > generators do NOT make large particles nor do they EVER produce CS > > that turns yellow. Particle size is .001 to .005 microns. See > > > http://www.silvergen.com/toppage2.htm > > > for visual evidence of particle size. > > > You may be correct in stating that the edges release the silver > > more quickly than the surface but the facts are the facts > > current limiting and circulation of the water during production > > using large surface area equals small particles as long as one > > stays under 2 ma./square inch. I hear of many people getting > > yellow CS using other generators that use round wire so you may > > want to rethink your argument. > > > Regards, > > > Trem Williams > > www.silvergen.com > > Hi Trem, > > Nice to hear from you. Of course you can use flat electrodes - you > just have to reduce the current. This means it will be slower than > an equivalent system using round wires and the same wetted area. > > I used to run at 1.4 mA per square inch, and it usually turned > yellow or black after a few days when I tried to make high ppm cs. I > had a low-level residual Shingles infection, and the cs made at this > current had no effect. Not true. Just because you used 1.4 ma/square inch and got yellow CS doesn't mean a thing to me. I use 2 ma/square inch in the SG7 and as I said earlier, it is ALWAYS clear at 20+ ppm. And it produces 2 gallons/hour at 5 ppm or 1 gallon/hour at 10 ppm, and so on. That's not slow in my book. Stirring has a great deal to do with the end product, both in particle size and the allowable current density. And it never turns color. And to try to make a case about efficacy of ions versus ions isn't valid. It either works or it doesn't. If you made yellow CS it obviously had a lot of large colloids and that would certainly explain why it didn't work as well as that made with more ions. As I pointed out earlier, our colloids range in size from .001 to .005 microns. They never reflect light. Too small. If the ions do the job, as I suspect, then making it more quickly by using large surface area flat electrodes and higher current density with stirring is much better than running at less current in order to prevent agglomeration. That's the only thing I see you've been successful at is. perfecting a slow process that is about the same as watching paint dry. > However, reducing the current density to 80 to 100 microamps per > square inch produces very strong and very clear cs. The rods stay > clean, which indicates very little is wasted making black sludge. It > doesn't turn yellow. > > The cs made with this current density killed the Shingles infection. > The scabs fell off several days later, and have not returned. So is that to say the CS I make would not be just as efficatious? I think it would work exactly the same. I can dazzle you with anecdotal recoveries from a myriad of diseases. Let's not get into whether ions or colloids are best. I'll leave that to others. > > I now only need to take a mouthful every three or four days, instead > of drinking 8 oz each day as I did before. This helps the digestion > a great deal, since much less enters the intestine to kill the > friendlies. > > I use 12 ga folded into a "W" to increase the surface area, which > allows proportionally higher current and shortens the run time. > > I have done a few runs at higher currents that do turn yellow with > the same total number of Coulombs. So I believe there is a critical > current density somewhere between 100 and perhaps 1,000 uA/sq in. You do not take into account the fact that stirring moves the ions away from the anode rapidly enough that they do not agglomerate. > > So the effect of flat plates is you reach the critical current > density sooner than with round wire, since the current is higher at > the edges. I don't believe it. See previous statements. > > With either method, if you are making black sludge and have to clean > the rods, reduce the current and increase the brew time. > > I tried three methods of stirring, and
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
I think your below comment was unjustified, but then you may not share your C.S. production ability with friends... I happen to be watching several cancer patients get well from ingestion of C.S. Simply Stated, I'd be in the kitchen brewing the stuff (24/7) if I did not have a SG-7 model. A lot of people become very selfish, when they discover medical techniques that truly work. They try to take the knowledge and hide it away (for their use only) Pessimism & Selfishness are not the way to handle medicine. I also encourage you not to follow the selfish path Ode. Free Society will certainly parish without this most basic form of courage... Regards, Alexander - Original Message - From: "Ode Coyote" To: Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 9:03 AM Subject: Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > No, it's because you didn't lay out $500 , therefore having the need to > feel it was justified when 'you' only need a small amount. > > Both make very high quality CS and work essentially the same way on the > same principles. Scale is expensive and presents expensive problems to > design around. Small is easier to handle. > Ode > > At 03:11 PM 6/9/2003 -0500, you wrote: > >My CS is low grade simply because I have a small generator?? Ruth > >- Original Message - > >From: <mailto:carpae.d...@cox.net>carpae.d...@cox.net > >To: <mailto:silver-list@eskimo.com>silver-list@eskimo.com > >Cc: <mailto:carpae.d...@cox.net>carpae.d...@cox.net > >Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 2:55 PM > >Subject: CS>$$$ perpectives > > > >Hello All :) > > > >1-pack cigarettses=$5.00 x 2 x 7 = $70.00 per week... > >1-tank high-test <mailto:gasoli...@$1.80>gasoli...@$1.80 x 15 x 2 = $54.00 > >per week... > >1-family (of 4) outing at the movies = @ $50.00... > >1 PWT meter should be very affordable if it's value is traded > > against these luxery commodities, over the course of just one > > calendar week > > > >If that's not good enough, then consider the Emergency Room treatment of > >just one severe case of the flu... @ $150.00+ and that dose not even > >include the cost of expensive medications/antibiotics... > > > >That's how I justified going out and dropping $500.00 on a Silvergen > >SG-7 pro C.S. generator... It makes 5 gallons of extremely high grade > >C.S., in the time that a little unit makes a cup full of low grade C.S. > >Also, in the advent of a major Bio-Attack, my friends and family will have > >a liberal supply at all times... I'm prior service, and have a little > >knowledge of how terrorism operates... SARS was & is probably just a test > >of how the real (probably soon to be released ) killer bio-weapon pathogen > >will spread. They are studying The SARS Pattern, and analyzing the spread > >pattern... Also the true > >Bio-weapon is probably a strain of something that is based on resistance > >to what was observed to be practicable on a mass treatment scale by the > >U.S. & Canada... However, If you have a C.S. generator & even better the > >entire set of E.M. devices that go with the Dr. Robert Beck protocol... > >Then rest easy, you will be just fine... Just do not plan on being able to > >buy C.S. through the mail, once the real Bio-weapon is deployed... The > >U.S.P.S. will be under quarantine and shut down... When I was 16 the house > >next door was blown up by soviet terrorist... They planted 2 bombs... A > >little one to get every ones attention, and a bigger one to kill the > >curious people that would naturally try to start inspecting the > >ruins @ an hour later... SARS is probably modified G.W.I. > >(microplasma-fermentiens (incognitos-strain)), that Sadam shot at our > >troops in aerosol-tipped warheads atop scud missiles, during Dessert Storm... > > > >Regards, > >A.J.F. > > > > > > > -- > 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: silver-list@eskimo.com > > Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html > > List maintainer: Mike Devour > >
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m60005.html Re: CS>$$$ perpectives From: Ode Coyote Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 06:18:24 > BTW I recently saw a newish electroplating setup and the electrode > shape was changed to a half cylinder with flat faces towards each > other vs flat rectangle since my experience with the process. I was thinking of a similar approach using concentric cylinders. But this would affect the circulation and prevent even dispersal unless stirring were used. The advantage of open wire is it allows free dispersal and no stirring is needed at low currents. Even with round wire, my experiences with stirring showed the cs was less effective than without for the same current density and number of Coulombs transferred. As you point out, the key would be to find the wear pattern. If the thickness diminishes evenly, it may be a good idea. If it simply wears from the bottom, then it is no better than cut rods. As you mentioned some time ago, your rods using round wire with a "U" at the bottom wear evenly. This is a good indication of uniform current density and low particle generation. Best Regards, Mike Monett -- 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: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
These things can be designed around whatever the limitations and Trem IS a good and dedicated design man. Ode to Trem from Ode BTW I recently saw a newish electroplating setup and the electrode shape was changed to a half cylinder with flat faces towards each other vs flat rectangle since my experience with the process. At 04:20 PM 6/9/2003 -0700, you wrote: Hi Mike, I've been hearing you knock flat silver electrodes for some time now and think it's about time to say something. I'm SilverGen. Our generators do NOT make large particles nor do they EVER produce CS that turns yellow. Particle size is .001 to .005 microns. See http://www.silvergen.com/toppage2.htm for visual evidence of particle size. You may be correct in stating that the edges release the silver more quickly than the surface but the facts are the facts current limiting and circulation of the water during production using large surface area equals small particles as long as one stays under 2 ma./square inch. I hear of many people getting yellow CS using other generators that use round wire so you may want to rethink your argument. Regards, Trem Williams www.silvergen.com - Original Message - From: "Mike Monett" To: Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 3:32 PM Subject: Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m59977.html > Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > From: Ruth Bertella > Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 13:04:07 > > > My CS is low grade simply because I have a small generator?? > > > Ruth > > Your unit is fine. > > The best cs is made very slowly. Please see my post on ULVDC at > > http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m58781.html > > Steve confirms this approach works well: > > http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m59807.html > > and Dick posted a schematic: > > http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m59616.html > > The key is to operate at very low current density. Units that operate > quickly and use small electrodes tend to make large particles. This > causes the solution to turn black and plate out quickly. Besides being > unpalatable, this reduces the number of silver ions available to kill > bacteria and viruses. So the cs is not very effective. > > It is very difficult to increase the wetted area and keep uniform current > density. For example, many units use flat strips of silver instead of > round wire. This tends to concentrate the current at the edges and > produce large particles. > > So, faster is not necessarily better, regardless of the price. > > Best Regards, > > Mike Monett > > > -- > The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. > > Instructions for unsubscribing may be found at: http://silverlist.org > > To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com > > Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html > > List maintainer: Mike Devour > > > >
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
Is that 1.5 volts or 1.5 watts? Harborfreight has 1.5 watt/ 12 volt amorpheous cell solar units on sale for $10. probably 125 milliamps at 18 volts with no load in full sun Ode At 03:28 PM 6/9/2003 -0500, you wrote: A.J.F. Go just a little more and get a solar panel. The one (1.5v) I have will make a qt of 7 to 10 ppm CS in about 10 hrs. Just it going to the two . silver wires. No fancy stuff here. Sincerely Yours, Hank - Original Message - From: <mailto:carpae.d...@cox.net>carpae.d...@cox.net To: <mailto:silver-list@eskimo.com>silver-list@eskimo.com Cc: <mailto:carpae.d...@cox.net>carpae.d...@cox.net Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 2:55 PM Subject: CS>$$$ perpectives Hello All :) 1-pack cigarettses=$5.00 x 2 x 7 = $70.00 per week... 1-tank high-test <mailto:gasoli...@$1.80>gasoli...@$1.80 x 15 x 2 = $54.00 per week... 1-family (of 4) outing at the movies = @ $50.00... 1 PWT meter should be very affordable if it's value is traded against these luxery commodities, over the course of just one calendar week If that's not good enough, then consider the Emergency Room treatment of just one severe case of the flu... @ $150.00+ and that dose not even include the cost of expensive medications/antibiotics... That's how I justified going out and dropping $500.00 on a Silvergen SG-7 pro C.S. generator... It makes 5 gallons of extremely high grade C.S., in the time that a little unit makes a cup full of low grade C.S. Also, in the advent of a major Bio-Attack, my friends and family will have a liberal supply at all times... I'm prior service, and have a little knowledge of how terrorism operates... SARS was & is probably just a test of how the real (probably soon to be released ) killer bio-weapon pathogen will spread. They are studying The SARS Pattern, and analyzing the spread pattern... Also the true Bio-weapon is probably a strain of something that is based on resistance to what was observed to be practicable on a mass treatment scale by the U.S. & Canada... However, If you have a C.S. generator & even better the entire set of E.M. devices that go with the Dr. Robert Beck protocol... Then rest easy, you will be just fine... Just do not plan on being able to buy C.S. through the mail, once the real Bio-weapon is deployed... The U.S.P.S. will be under quarantine and shut down... When I was 16 the house next door was blown up by soviet terrorist... They planted 2 bombs... A little one to get every ones attention, and a bigger one to kill the curious people that would naturally try to start inspecting the ruins @ an hour later... SARS is probably modified G.W.I. (microplasma-fermentiens (incognitos-strain)), that Sadam shot at our troops in aerosol-tipped warheads atop scud missiles, during Dessert Storm... Regards, A.J.F. -- 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: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
No, it's because you didn't lay out $500 , therefore having the need to feel it was justified when 'you' only need a small amount. Both make very high quality CS and work essentially the same way on the same principles. Scale is expensive and presents expensive problems to design around. Small is easier to handle. Ode At 03:11 PM 6/9/2003 -0500, you wrote: My CS is low grade simply because I have a small generator?? Ruth - Original Message - From: <mailto:carpae.d...@cox.net>carpae.d...@cox.net To: <mailto:silver-list@eskimo.com>silver-list@eskimo.com Cc: <mailto:carpae.d...@cox.net>carpae.d...@cox.net Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 2:55 PM Subject: CS>$$$ perpectives Hello All :) 1-pack cigarettses=$5.00 x 2 x 7 = $70.00 per week... 1-tank high-test <mailto:gasoli...@$1.80>gasoli...@$1.80 x 15 x 2 = $54.00 per week... 1-family (of 4) outing at the movies = @ $50.00... 1 PWT meter should be very affordable if it's value is traded against these luxery commodities, over the course of just one calendar week If that's not good enough, then consider the Emergency Room treatment of just one severe case of the flu... @ $150.00+ and that dose not even include the cost of expensive medications/antibiotics... That's how I justified going out and dropping $500.00 on a Silvergen SG-7 pro C.S. generator... It makes 5 gallons of extremely high grade C.S., in the time that a little unit makes a cup full of low grade C.S. Also, in the advent of a major Bio-Attack, my friends and family will have a liberal supply at all times... I'm prior service, and have a little knowledge of how terrorism operates... SARS was & is probably just a test of how the real (probably soon to be released ) killer bio-weapon pathogen will spread. They are studying The SARS Pattern, and analyzing the spread pattern... Also the true Bio-weapon is probably a strain of something that is based on resistance to what was observed to be practicable on a mass treatment scale by the U.S. & Canada... However, If you have a C.S. generator & even better the entire set of E.M. devices that go with the Dr. Robert Beck protocol... Then rest easy, you will be just fine... Just do not plan on being able to buy C.S. through the mail, once the real Bio-weapon is deployed... The U.S.P.S. will be under quarantine and shut down... When I was 16 the house next door was blown up by soviet terrorist... They planted 2 bombs... A little one to get every ones attention, and a bigger one to kill the curious people that would naturally try to start inspecting the ruins @ an hour later... SARS is probably modified G.W.I. (microplasma-fermentiens (incognitos-strain)), that Sadam shot at our troops in aerosol-tipped warheads atop scud missiles, during Dessert Storm... Regards, A.J.F. -- 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: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
url : http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m59992.html Re: CS>$$$ perpectives From: Robert Berger Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 18:25:24 > Mike, > You aren't listening, or should I say reading. > I make 2 gallons of 30 to 40 true PPM using 35 volts with a > regulator set to turn on at 12.6 ma or 320 microamps /sqin of > anode Time, five hours, and this is were I shut down. Crystal > clear sub nano in size, and stays that way! > TEM's to prove it They only cost $75.00 per copy!!! Do it and > report back. > "Ole Bob" Hi Robert, A current density of 320 uA/sq. may be a good value, although I prefer running much lower. As I understand it, you have a curved plate for the anode, and a rod for the cathode. This means the current density is greater at the cathode, which is the location where misting will start. One way to check is to turn off the stirring and let it run until it just starts to mist. That shows the location of the highest current density. On a flat plate, it starts at the edges. If the current stayed at 12.6 mA the whole brew time, you would transfer 226 Coulombs. This would produce 6.69 ppm/hr in 2 gallons, for a total of 33.49 ppm. Here's the equations: gal = 2 ; number of gallons hrs = 5 ; hours I = 12.6e-3 ; current in Amperes ml = 3785.41 * gal ; milliliters x = 1e6 * 107.87 / 96485; x = 1117.99 sec = hrs * 3600 ; seconds C = I * sec ; coulombs ppm = x * C / ml ; parts per million ppmhr = x * I * 3600 / ml ; ppm per hr Here's the results. Please check my numbers to make sure I didn't goof somewhere: Variables: C = +226.8000 gal = +2.00 hrs = +5.00 I = +0.012600 ml= +7570.820 ppm = +33.4919941771666 ppmhr = +6.6983988354333 sec = +18000.00 However, you mentioned earlier that it takes 5 hrs for the current limiting to set in, and you mentioned most of the ppm is deposited in the last 50 minutes. http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m59416.html So the total ppm may be a bit lower than calculated above. One way to test is to put some in a glass and add a few shakes of salt. A strong concentration will show an immediate response and produce a strong dispersion. A weak concentration may only show up after several minutes when the salt is completely dissolved. It may be difficult to see the cloud even when you put a lamp nearby for sidelighting. Finally, a recent post mentioned difficulty getting correlation between different PWT's. So the ppm could be a bit less than measured, which means the solution is less likely to turn yellow and plate out. Obviously, the weaker the concentration, the less likely this is to happen. Can you post or email a copy of the current vs time curve? I will integrate it to get the total Coulombs, which will indicate the upper bound for the ppm. Best Regards, Mike Monett -- 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: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
Mike, You aren't listening, or should I say reading. I make 2 gallons of 30 to 40 true PPM using 35 volts with a regulator set to turn on at 12 .6 ma or 320 microamps /sqin of anode Time, five hours, and this is were I shut down. Crystal clear sub nano in size, and stays that way! TEM's to prove it They only cost $75.00 per copy!!! Do it and report back. "Ole Bob" -- 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: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m59988.html Re: CS>$$$ perpectives From: Trem Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 16:22:08 > Hi Mike, > I've been hearing you knock flat silver electrodes for some time > now and think it's about time to say something. I'm SilverGen. Our > generators do NOT make large particles nor do they EVER produce CS > that turns yellow. Particle size is .001 to .005 microns. See > http://www.silvergen.com/toppage2.htm > for visual evidence of particle size. > You may be correct in stating that the edges release the silver > more quickly than the surface but the facts are the facts > current limiting and circulation of the water during production > using large surface area equals small particles as long as one > stays under 2 ma./square inch. I hear of many people getting > yellow CS using other generators that use round wire so you may > want to rethink your argument. > Regards, > Trem Williams > www.silvergen.com Hi Trem, Nice to hear from you. Of course you can use flat electrodes - you just have to reduce the current. This means it will be slower than an equivalent system using round wires and the same wetted area. I used to run at 1.4 mA per square inch, and it usually turned yellow or black after a few days when I tried to make high ppm cs. I had a low-level residual Shingles infection, and the cs made at this current had no effect. However, reducing the current density to 80 to 100 microamps per square inch produces very strong and very clear cs. The rods stay clean, which indicates very little is wasted making black sludge. It doesn't turn yellow. The cs made with this current density killed the Shingles infection. The scabs fell off several days later, and have not returned. I now only need to take a mouthful every three or four days, instead of drinking 8 oz each day as I did before. This helps the digestion a great deal, since much less enters the intestine to kill the friendlies. I use 12 ga folded into a "W" to increase the surface area, which allows proportionally higher current and shortens the run time. I have done a few runs at higher currents that do turn yellow with the same total number of Coulombs. So I believe there is a critical current density somewhere between 100 and perhaps 1,000 uA/sq in. So the effect of flat plates is you reach the critical current density sooner than with round wire, since the current is higher at the edges. With either method, if you are making black sludge and have to clean the rods, reduce the current and increase the brew time. I tried three methods of stirring, and it helps reduce the sludge. But it had no effect on the Shingles. Low current is the only thing that worked. The other problem with flat plates is keeping them straight and aligned. 12 ga wire is quite stiff, so it holds alignment very well. Thin sheet is very difficult to keep flat and straight. Another problem is simple contamination. Systems that leave the rods loose means they will lay flat. I once got very ill after getting a drop of something on the rods. I never found where it came from. With 12 ga wire, you can bolt the rods to a plastic lid. This keeps them aligned, and you can set the lid upside-down on a table with the rods sticking in the air while you are emptying the cs to another container. So you never have to touch the rods or handle them. Flat is OK. Round is better. Best Regards, Mike Monett -- 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: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
RIGHT ON TREM.!!! I use 320 microamps with curves sheet electrodes and the TEM shows sub-nano meter to 28 nano meter size "Ole Bob" -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. Instructions for unsubscribing may be found at: http://silverlist.org To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
Hi Mike, I've been hearing you knock flat silver electrodes for some time now and think it's about time to say something. I'm SilverGen. Our generators do NOT make large particles nor do they EVER produce CS that turns yellow. Particle size is .001 to .005 microns. See http://www.silvergen.com/toppage2.htm for visual evidence of particle size. You may be correct in stating that the edges release the silver more quickly than the surface but the facts are the facts current limiting and circulation of the water during production using large surface area equals small particles as long as one stays under 2 ma./square inch. I hear of many people getting yellow CS using other generators that use round wire so you may want to rethink your argument. Regards, Trem Williams www.silvergen.com - Original Message - From: "Mike Monett" To: Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 3:32 PM Subject: Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m59977.html > Re: CS>$$$ perpectives > From: Ruth Bertella > Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 13:04:07 > > > My CS is low grade simply because I have a small generator?? > > > Ruth > > Your unit is fine. > > The best cs is made very slowly. Please see my post on ULVDC at > > http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m58781.html > > Steve confirms this approach works well: > > http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m59807.html > > and Dick posted a schematic: > > http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m59616.html > > The key is to operate at very low current density. Units that operate > quickly and use small electrodes tend to make large particles. This > causes the solution to turn black and plate out quickly. Besides being > unpalatable, this reduces the number of silver ions available to kill > bacteria and viruses. So the cs is not very effective. > > It is very difficult to increase the wetted area and keep uniform current > density. For example, many units use flat strips of silver instead of > round wire. This tends to concentrate the current at the edges and > produce large particles. > > So, faster is not necessarily better, regardless of the price. > > Best Regards, > > Mike Monett > > > -- > 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: silver-list@eskimo.com > > Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html > > List maintainer: Mike Devour > > > >
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m59977.html Re: CS>$$$ perpectives From: Ruth Bertella Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 13:04:07 > My CS is low grade simply because I have a small generator?? > Ruth Your unit is fine. The best cs is made very slowly. Please see my post on ULVDC at http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m58781.html Steve confirms this approach works well: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m59807.html and Dick posted a schematic: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m59616.html The key is to operate at very low current density. Units that operate quickly and use small electrodes tend to make large particles. This causes the solution to turn black and plate out quickly. Besides being unpalatable, this reduces the number of silver ions available to kill bacteria and viruses. So the cs is not very effective. It is very difficult to increase the wetted area and keep uniform current density. For example, many units use flat strips of silver instead of round wire. This tends to concentrate the current at the edges and produce large particles. So, faster is not necessarily better, regardless of the price. Best Regards, Mike Monett -- 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: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
I agree on the test. I think it will be the "plague". Notice how the ex Nazi drug companies are pushing Codex all over the world - they have now gotten a toehold into China-- no more cheap effective TCM for the citizens. They must now use drugs. Go to www.iahf.com and read awhile. TJ Garland, CMO supplier there are no incurable illnesses-only incurable people. From: "Hank" If that's not good enough, then consider the Emergency Room treatment of just one severe case of the flu... @ $150.00+ and that dose not even include the cost of expensive medications/antibiotics... That's how I justified going out and dropping $500.00 on a Silvergen SG-7 pro C.S. generator... It makes 5 gallons of extremely high grade C.S., in the time that a little unit makes a cup full of low grade C.S. Also, in the advent of a major Bio-Attack, my friends and family will have a liberal supply at all times... I'm prior service, and have a little knowledge of how terrorism operates... SARS was & is probably just a test of how the real (probably soon to be released ) killer bio-weapon pathogen will spread. They are studying The SARS Pattern, and analyzing the spread pattern... Also the true Bio-weapon is probably a strain of something that is based on resistance to what was observed to be practicable on a mass treatment scale by the U.S. & Canada... However, If you have a C.S. generator & even better the entire set of E.M. devices that go with the Dr. Robert Beck protocol... Then rest easy, you will be just fine... Just do not plan on being able to buy C.S. through the mail, once the real Bio-weapon is deployed... The U.S.P.S. will be under quarantine and shut down... When I was 16 the house next door was blown up by soviet terrorist... They planted 2 bombs... A little one to get every ones attention, and a bigger one to kill the curious people that would naturally try to start inspecting the ruins @ an hour later... SARS is probably modified G.W.I. (microplasma-fermentiens (incognitos-strain)), that Sadam shot at our troops in aerosol-tipped warheads atop scud missiles, during Dessert Storm... Regards, A.J.F. T _ Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail -- 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: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
A.J.F. Go just a little more and get a solar panel. The one (1.5v) I have will make a qt of 7 to 10 ppm CS in about 10 hrs. Just it going to the two . silver wires. No fancy stuff here. Sincerely Yours, Hank - Original Message - From: carpae.d...@cox.net To: silver-list@eskimo.com Cc: carpae.d...@cox.net Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 2:55 PM Subject: CS>$$$ perpectives Hello All :) 1-pack cigarettses=$5.00 x 2 x 7 = $70.00 per week... 1-tank high-test gasoli...@$1.80 x 15 x 2 = $54.00 per week... 1-family (of 4) outing at the movies = @ $50.00... 1 PWT meter should be very affordable if it's value is traded against these luxery commodities, over the course of just one calendar week If that's not good enough, then consider the Emergency Room treatment of just one severe case of the flu... @ $150.00+ and that dose not even include the cost of expensive medications/antibiotics... That's how I justified going out and dropping $500.00 on a Silvergen SG-7 pro C.S. generator... It makes 5 gallons of extremely high grade C.S., in the time that a little unit makes a cup full of low grade C.S. Also, in the advent of a major Bio-Attack, my friends and family will have a liberal supply at all times... I'm prior service, and have a little knowledge of how terrorism operates... SARS was & is probably just a test of how the real (probably soon to be released ) killer bio-weapon pathogen will spread. They are studying The SARS Pattern, and analyzing the spread pattern... Also the true Bio-weapon is probably a strain of something that is based on resistance to what was observed to be practicable on a mass treatment scale by the U.S. & Canada... However, If you have a C.S. generator & even better the entire set of E.M. devices that go with the Dr. Robert Beck protocol... Then rest easy, you will be just fine... Just do not plan on being able to buy C.S. through the mail, once the real Bio-weapon is deployed... The U.S.P.S. will be under quarantine and shut down... When I was 16 the house next door was blown up by soviet terrorist... They planted 2 bombs... A little one to get every ones attention, and a bigger one to kill the curious people that would naturally try to start inspecting the ruins @ an hour later... SARS is probably modified G.W.I. (microplasma-fermentiens (incognitos-strain)), that Sadam shot at our troops in aerosol-tipped warheads atop scud missiles, during Dessert Storm... Regards, A.J.F.
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
My CS is low grade simply because I have a small generator?? Ruth - Original Message - From: carpae.d...@cox.net To: silver-list@eskimo.com Cc: carpae.d...@cox.net Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 2:55 PM Subject: CS>$$$ perpectives Hello All :) 1-pack cigarettses=$5.00 x 2 x 7 = $70.00 per week... 1-tank high-test gasoli...@$1.80 x 15 x 2 = $54.00 per week... 1-family (of 4) outing at the movies = @ $50.00... 1 PWT meter should be very affordable if it's value is traded against these luxery commodities, over the course of just one calendar week If that's not good enough, then consider the Emergency Room treatment of just one severe case of the flu... @ $150.00+ and that dose not even include the cost of expensive medications/antibiotics... That's how I justified going out and dropping $500.00 on a Silvergen SG-7 pro C.S. generator... It makes 5 gallons of extremely high grade C.S., in the time that a little unit makes a cup full of low grade C.S. Also, in the advent of a major Bio-Attack, my friends and family will have a liberal supply at all times... I'm prior service, and have a little knowledge of how terrorism operates... SARS was & is probably just a test of how the real (probably soon to be released ) killer bio-weapon pathogen will spread. They are studying The SARS Pattern, and analyzing the spread pattern... Also the true Bio-weapon is probably a strain of something that is based on resistance to what was observed to be practicable on a mass treatment scale by the U.S. & Canada... However, If you have a C.S. generator & even better the entire set of E.M. devices that go with the Dr. Robert Beck protocol... Then rest easy, you will be just fine... Just do not plan on being able to buy C.S. through the mail, once the real Bio-weapon is deployed... The U.S.P.S. will be under quarantine and shut down... When I was 16 the house next door was blown up by soviet terrorist... They planted 2 bombs... A little one to get every ones attention, and a bigger one to kill the curious people that would naturally try to start inspecting the ruins @ an hour later... SARS is probably modified G.W.I. (microplasma-fermentiens (incognitos-strain)), that Sadam shot at our troops in aerosol-tipped warheads atop scud missiles, during Dessert Storm... Regards, A.J.F.
CS>$$$ perpectives
Hello All :) 1-pack cigarettses=$5.00 x 2 x 7 = $70.00 per week... 1-tank high-test gasoli...@$1.80 x 15 x 2 = $54.00 per week... 1-family (of 4) outing at the movies = @ $50.00... 1 PWT meter should be very affordable if it's value is traded against these luxery commodities, over the course of just one calendar week If that's not good enough, then consider the Emergency Room treatment of just one severe case of the flu... @ $150.00+ and that dose not even include the cost of expensive medications/antibiotics... That's how I justified going out and dropping $500.00 on a Silvergen SG-7 pro C.S. generator... It makes 5 gallons of extremely high grade C.S., in the time that a little unit makes a cup full of low grade C.S. Also, in the advent of a major Bio-Attack, my friends and family will have a liberal supply at all times... I'm prior service, and have a little knowledge of how terrorism operates... SARS was & is probably just a test of how the real (probably soon to be released ) killer bio-weapon pathogen will spread. They are studying The SARS Pattern, and analyzing the spread pattern... Also the true Bio-weapon is probably a strain of something that is based on resistance to what was observed to be practicable on a mass treatment scale by the U.S. & Canada... However, If you have a C.S. generator & even better the entire set of E.M. devices that go with the Dr. Robert Beck protocol... Then rest easy, you will be just fine... Just do not plan on being able to buy C.S. through the mail, once the real Bio-weapon is deployed... The U.S.P.S. will be under quarantine and shut down... When I was 16 the house next door was blown up by soviet terrorist... They planted 2 bombs... A little one to get every ones attention, and a bigger one to kill the curious people that would naturally try to start inspecting the ruins @ an hour later... SARS is probably modified G.W.I. (microplasma-fermentiens (incognitos-strain)), that Sadam shot at our troops in aerosol-tipped warheads atop scud missiles, during Dessert Storm... Regards, A.J.F.
