03-07-2006
Update 18.
EBONITE.
Aim.
To clear up some confusion surrounding the use of ebonite as an
insulating spacer in a Joe cell.
Introduction.
The topic of ebonite insulators crops up with monotonous regularity on
Joe cell related groups.
I am dumbfounded when I read some of the inputs that are supposedly
quoting what I wrote on the subject.
I am equally surprised by people who write to say that so and so said
such and such and thus ebonite is worse than useless for the purpose.
In this update I will give scientific and ‘pseudo scientific’ reasoning
why I suggested ebonite as a suitable spacer.
Before I start on the main topic, I would like to clear up some items
that may be adding to the misunderstanding.
1. Joe did NOT use ebonite in his cells.
2. Peter did NOT use ebonite in his cells.
3. I did NOT ever say that you must use ebonite.
On the contrary I have always suggested a range of materials for
spacers.
However I have never suggested Buna, as I have no practical experience
with it.
I would rather speak from practical experience and with Buna I have
none.
4. As a result of hundreds of experiments I found that ebonite (the
RIGHT type) was the best choice in MY cells. You cell may be different. Start
of with what you have and experiment.
5. To the best of my knowledge, one person started the story that
ebonite was ‘no good’ as an insulator. This was based on his supposition,
without any actual experimental verification to see and record any differences
when using ebonite as a spacer.
There is nothing wrong with having an opinion. However spreading a
dogmatic view that is not based on any solid experimental evidence whatsoever
can do a lot of harm.
To say that only Buna will work is nonsensical, as Joe did not use Buna
when he invented his variation of the cell. As Joe did not use Buna in his
early cells, by logic his cells could not have worked. They did.
6. To date the best in print reasoning why ebonite is ‘no good’ is this
sentence:
“ Any material such as ebonite, plastic and some types of rubber carry a static charge and in the Joe Cell will do so under water and discharge the cell.”
I (amongst others) have done my best to understand this sentence at many levels without any success.
On a purely conventional scientific level it is nonsense.
Apart from that one sentence I have not been able to find any literature against the use of ebonite. If somebody can find any, please let me know and I will modify this update to reflect the facts.
The only negativity I have found relates to the high initial cost and the difficulty of shaping and fitting the ebonite spacers.
However there may be valid reasoning why ebonite may not work for some cell configurations. More contributions are required from actual experimental research from other members.
This update is my contribution to the cause.
Ebonite, the material.
Ebonite is the common name for a form of vulcanized caoutchouc or India
rubber.
By heating the rubber and chemically combining it with sulphur a harder
end product results.
If the sulphur content is increased to around 30%, the inelastic
product that results is known as ebonite.
Charles Goodyear discovered the process accidentally in 1839.
Variables and problems.
As stated in the introduction, I find that the ‘right’ ebonite is superior
to most of the dozen or so spacers that I have experimented with.
I started of by using natural rubber, this was very soft, of a dark
yellowish tinge and rapidly turned to a jelly in a stage three cell.
As a result of this failing I started experimenting with harder forms
of rubber. I followed Joe’s lead and started using ‘counter’ hose (see my
manual Chapter 5, page 26). This worked well but I still had trouble with leaky
cells.
I moved on to black oxy hose and this also worked well but my cells
were still leaky.
All along I was not happy with the black colour of the hoses, as I
suspected that it was a pigment inclusion, an excess of carbon or both. Either
way I suspected that it might have been affecting the spacer’s resistance and
dielectric constant at high frequencies.
I next had a very good look at all the different types of rubber
products, with the aim of finding one that was suitable for the very unique
task at hand.
It was like opening up a can of worms, variations and products by the
handful.
India rubber is a coagulated juice of at least six different genera of
trees or plants belonging to three different natural orders.
The total species (thus possibilities) were around fifty!
For ebonite the exact percentage of added sulphur, the added pigment
and the manufacturing process increased the variables even more.
My aim was to find the ‘right’ and harder rubber insulator for the cell
and the choice was not simple.
I will not bore the reader with my lengthy research to find the ‘right’
ebonite.
Suffice to say that the best rubber comes from an Amazon region called
Para.
Para rubber is the best, thus ebonite based on Para rubber is the
preferred choice.
In modern times this is like finding hen’s teeth, the lack of
information is deafening. <grin>
Ebonite comes in several grades, and the composition also varies. I
have tried about six varieties and I am sure that there are many more.
Suggestions.
I would suggest an ebonite that has an even texture, homogenous, and
that is free from any traces of metallic particles and foreign matter. If you
give a sample piece a high polish, there should not be any air bubble
inclusions.
I have found that the colour is a very good indicator. A rich dark
brown is preferred. I am not happy with the modern slate to light black
variety.
Where do you get it?
I have found the right dark brown polished rod being used as part of
old electrostatic demonstration kits. Included was half a cat’s fur including
the head!
I have also seen the right type of ebonite used as hand pieces in
surgery and early diathermy equipment.
I would suggest antique dealers, flea markets, garage sales and similar
as the most likely place to find suitable material.
Buna versus ebonite.
The people suggesting that ebonite is ‘no good’ and that Buna is the
only way to go have not written anything factual whatsoever to support their
claim.
So what is Buna and why it ‘better’ and more importantly apart from
somebody’s ‘gut feeling’ is there any scientific reason that it is ‘better’?
Buna.
Natural rubber contains a linear polymer of isoprene. Pure rubber is
87.27% carbon and 12.73% hydrogen.
Buna is a synthetic rubber produced from related monomers. It is
produced by polymerization of butadiene using sodium.
Differences.
So what are the differences for our application?
Initially they are both elastomers (rubbery properties),
Ebonite is natural rubber Buna is synthetic rubber.
Ebonite is hard, expensive, rare and difficult to work with.
Buna is soft, cheap, easily available and easy to work with.
On the above comparison you would think that Buna is the only way to
go.
What about that quote in the introduction section that, “...some types of
rubber carry a static charge and in the Joe Cell will do so under water and
discharge the cell”?
As said, I personally have no idea as to what is inferred, but I would
suggest that if the problem is related to “static charge” that we should check
the dielectric constants for some relevant spacer material.
Material Constant in Hz
10^3 10^6 10^8
Nylon 66 3.75 3.33 3.16
Teflon 2.1 2.1 2.36
Perspex 3.12 2.76 -
Buna S 2.66 2.56 2.56
Neoprene 6.60 6.26 4.5
Silicon rubber 3.12 3.1 3.06
Ebonite 2.94 2.74 2.42
As can be seen the dielectric constant for ebonite and Buna is just about
identical. So this cannot be the problem.
At a glance the main difference is the use of either sulphur (in
ebonite) or sodium (in Buna).
Sulphur (S), atomic number 16, relative atomic mass 32.064.
Sodium (Na), atomic number 11, relative atomic mass 22.898.
In brief, on the scientific level I cannot fine any reason why the
electrical or chemical characteristics make Buna ‘good’ and ebonite ‘bad’.
So let us see what pseudo science can deliver.
Conventional scientists should nor read the following ‘rubbish’, skip
to the Conclusion paragraph.
Pseudo science and the spacers.
1. As mentioned in my manual (Chapter 3, page 10) I chose to use
polarity-conductive materials.
Ebonite is India rubber ‘doped’ with sulphur. Sulphur is a negative
(cool) material and is suitable for a negative cell.
2. From Walter Russell’s table of elements sulphur is in the 6TH
octave and has the negative number of 602.
Sodium is in the same octave (6th) and has a positive number
of 601.
As can be seen Buna is not a negative polarity-conductive material.
3. From Occult Chemistry (Beasant and Leadbeater) we have:
Sulphur. 576 ultimate physical atoms.4 funnels of 144 atoms.
Tetrahedron group. Negative.
Sodium. 418 ultimate physical atoms. 12 funnels of 16 atoms. Simplest
of the dumb-bell group, so can be taken as the ground plan for the dumb-bell
group. Positive.
Again we have the negative and positive variation.
4. From Radiesthesia (Abbe Memet) we have:
Sulphur. Serial number 18, direction of fundamental ray 30 degrees
North West.
Sodium. Serial number 12, direction of fundamental ray North.
Water. Serial number 7, direction of fundamental ray 30 degrees North
West.
We can see that Sulphur is in alignment with water.
5. From The Etheric Formative
Forces (Dr. Guenther Wachsmuth) the four etheric formative forces can be
ascribed to geometric shapes.
Sulphur as a tetrahedron can be linked to the light ether (inducing
gaseous state), and sodium as a
dumb-bell to the warmth ether (inducing heat state).
The five examples above are relating to the possible characteristics
and behavior as seen by some of the world’s best experimenters and scientists.
These individuals looked ‘over the fence’ of mainstream science to
bring us another view of what is now considered as fact and reality.
Summary.
If we look at the hard science of present day knowledge, we could not differentiate between the use of ebonite or Buna as a spacer in the Joe cell.
Both seem to be equally suitable as an insulating spacer in a Joe cell.
If however we look outside the boundary of so-called official science, we can clearly see that the ebonite is far superior for advanced use, i.e. beyond the ‘shandy’ stage, or even car use stage.
It is well known that the Joe cell operation cannot be explained with present day science. I am not talking about theories (of which there are plenty); I am talking about scientific reasoning utilizing present scientific laws that clearly explains the empirical evidence.
All parts of the cell and the surrounding environment should be treated as responding to forces that are not yet fully understood.
Only then can an experimenter hope to control and utilize the many strange cell phenomena.
I would like to suggest that until we know the causes and not only work with the effects that we should consider all possibilities, even so-called pseudo scientific possibilities.
Conclusions.
I would suggest that an experimenter starts with the cheapest, easily obtainable spacer material that is at hand. In this respect Buna wins hands down, as it is used in cars, sealing rings for drain pipes and the industry in general, it is just about everywhere.
No doubt it was this convenience in procuring Buna as well as the ease of use that made it the ‘right’ material.
If you cell does what you want it to do, congratulations, Buna will suffice.
However,……………………<grin>
Alex.
*********************************
The experimenter's Guide to the Joe Cell