@FarrahDay
A pocket of water vapour within the liquid created by heat, is not the same as a pocket of water vapour created due to rarefaction. The pocket of water vapour created by heat will not rapidly collapse in on itself like the pocket of water vapour created as in cavitation.
Hmm, I was never speaking of "A pocket of water vapour" formed by heat, I was speaking of perfectly spherical bubbles formed due to pressure variations, I thought I was quite clear about this.
These great big bubbles and bubbling effect are due to the water boiling, not due solely - if at all - to cavitation. We know this from Savics crude graph. Cavitation bubbles in this device would likely be microscopic.
I think you are making pointless generalizations again, First I am not and never was speaking of "great big bubbles" nor a " pocket of water vapour" and the term "Boiling" is relative as water can boil due to heat being absorbed (2257 KJ/Kg to be exact) OR boil due to a drop in pressure and in both cases the water is considered as boiling.
You talk about pressure variations creating the bubbles, and yes, sure in cavitation, but gas is also formed when too much energy (heat) is absorbed by the liquid and it changes state, and these bubbles won't collapse until the surrounding liquid cools, and if it is being continually heated the bubbles will simple rise to the surface. These are two completely different things.
This statement tells me a great deal, In the graph the effect occurs near 100 Deg C, not at 100 Deg C, near 100 Deg C and water will not boil at less than 100 Deg C unless the pressure is lower than atmospheric and this only applies to the exact space where the pressure is lower. As well the change in state is dependent on two factors which are temperature and pressure and these two factors are dependent on one another, they are not different things as you have suggested.
Water can boil producing steam bubbles due to heat being absorbed then instantly condense if the pressure is raised just as water can instantly boil at a temperature lower than 100 Deg C if the pressure is lowered because the change in state is dependent on both temperature AND pressure. The graph below may clarify things, as they say a picture is worth a thousand words.
It could well be that any movement of the electrodes is simply due to the energetic bubbling off of the water vapour, and hence an effect rather than a cause.
This could be the case however I do not think it would explain a rise in heat output, which is why we are here --- aren't we?.
If the electrodes do vibrate with respect to each other due to interacting magnetic fields, then it has to be at mains frequency, ie. 50 - 60Hz, so that rules out standing waves. Also, if the current drops off as indicated by Savic's graph, then the amplitude of the vibrating electrodes will also decrease proportionally... so what does that tell us?
Well no it does not, if I strike a bell at 50Hz does this mean the bell must "ring" at 50Hz, well no that is just silly and the bell will ring at it's natural frequency between each strike.
As well if the current drops this could effect the vibrating electrodes however this is only if the current is solely responsible for the motion of the electrodes, is it? we do not know and that is the only point I would make.
It's funny that your posts always have the same old theme and you seem bound and determined to assume no device could ever produce excess energy from somewhere we have yet to understand. I don't mean to be overly critical of your doom and gloom outlook however just once I would like to hear a reason from you why or how something could work in reality. To my knowledge I have never seen a single post from you in which you have given reasons why or how something could work only generalized reasons why it cannot, do you find that a little odd?, I do.
Let's do a little thought experiment Farrah, if this device was hypothetically producing excess energy in the form of heat then where do you think the energy might come from and why?.
Regards
AC
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger
“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman