1. "To date, commercially available Brown’s Gas electrolyzers[made in mainland China] have been hard to acquire, very expensive, of dubious quality, of limited gas capacity, and the technical operation is not very well supported"p2. Inventor George Wiseman website: Yull Brown Patents: 4,081,656 & 4,014,777
  2. "The first and most important difference in my BG series cell electrolyzer designs and most commercially available electrolyzers is that my design lacks a transformer of any kind" [yet it can run off wall AC]p3
  3. "The series cell design[eg: like an automobile battery-each ‘cell’ has its own separate electrolyte and physically shares its plates in common with adjoining cells] turns nearly all the electricity taken from the wall into gas production, silen tly, and with very little waste heat. Series cell design allows simple, inexpensive compact size and light weight. P4.
  4. Two volts is dropped across each electrolyzer cell. There are 60 electrolyzer cells in series in a ‘series cell’ design. 60 cells x 2 volts drop/cell =120vdc. If a full wave rectifier is used on the AC wall current, a limiting capacitor in series w ith the full wave rectifier load on the AC power line will automatically limited any difference in voltage. This completely eliminates using a step down transformer P20
  5. More than one third of the electricity going through the conventional single cell electrolyzer is wasted as wattage(heat) in the rectifiers. However, a 1200 watt series cell electrolyzer for Brown’s gas only dissipates 6 watts across the diodes in its full wave rectifier. Nota bene: [James, check George’s arithmetic on page 4. He says: "However, a 1200 watt series cell electrolyzer at 120 volts only needs to draw 5 amps. 1.2 volts times 5 amps equals 6 watts he ating the diodes. Only a small heat sink is needed to cool these diodes, no fan." However, as I see it, at 1200 watts, a series cell electrolyzer at 120 volts needs to draw 10 amps. (P=ExI) A 1.2 volt drop across the bridge rectifier(.6v/diod e,2diodes or ½ the rectifier) is 12 watts heating the diodes. As George says, ‘Only a small heat sink is needed to cool this, no fan.’ I may have misread the text, or George has a seriously simple typo here-the hazards of desktop publishing. Your engineering friends would not forgive him this simple mistake if I am right .Call him and discuss these arguments on p4 with him. Perhaps he has just omitted a technical detail, I do not want to accuse him of a typo like this. I know he is telling the truth, because I saw him using a #2 cutting tip(quite large) with ‘tiny’ high voltage diodes. The ones in a conventional torch are bigger than your fist and have immense heat sinks!] George-there is a seriou sly simple typo here in your calculations. You must correct this-it reflects badly on you to the casual reader who knows nothing about Brown’;s Gas. Felis Catus.
  6. The electrolyzer design is fairly safe as described in this book. The pressure switch allows easy, automatic operation. The bubbler reliably arrests backfires. The electronic liquid and temperature controls help prevent accidents. The pressure rel ief valve prevents electrolyzer bursting in case the pressure relief switch fails.p6
  7. We’ve done some testing on torch tip gas volume requirements. For most applications, including cutting inch thick steel a #0 torch tip or a #0-3 cutting tip is adequate. A 1,000 liter per hour electrolyzer will support these applications. 1,000 liter s per hour requires 16 amps at 240VAC. P8.
  8. Volumes of gas needed to maintain a flame in various sized torch tips. The following chart shows minimum acceptable flame volumes in liters per hour and maximum possible volume(the volume at which the flame goes out due to excessive gas velocity) The " amps" side of the chart shows the DC amperage requirements for a 126 cell series cell electrolyzer, at 240 vdc to get the MINIMUM gas volume (L/h) required for the "Torch Tip". You can figure the Max. amperage in direct ratio to the liters Max. L/h produced. P8.
  9. Tip:

    Min. : L/h

    Max.: L/h

    Minimum Amps:





















  10. Welding Glass: Brown’s Gas works great to weld glass and fuse it around various materials. If the torch is directed directly upon the cold glass, it shatters. I have found that I must heat the glass from the edge slowly with the torch at some distance till the glass heats up; then I can direct the flame on the glass to perform whatever welding or shaping I wish. If you do glasswork you will have to let the glass cool very slowly, putting it in an oven or hot sand, or it will shatter do to the stress o f cooling unevenly. P40
  11. Welding Iron: I found the flame tended to oxidize the iron, cutting it instread of welding it. It was difficult to form a "puddle" to weld with. In short, my experiemts with welding iron have been unsuccessful to date. Note: I was able to weld iron using gasoline as a modifier fluid. Check on George: in his lecture to the Tesla Society Symposium, he said he could weld broken cast iron ‘as good as new’ using the gasoline modifier. This is a significant innovation using Brown’s Gas. P41.
  12. Cutting Cast Iron: Our Browns Gas torch cuts cast iron clean and fast. It is my understanding that cast iron is hard to cut with an oxy-acet torch, though I have been able to cut cast iron with an oxy acet torch. P41
  13. Welding Cast Iron: A welding torch #3 tip was able to make a nice puddle and easily welded cast iron. I was just melting it together with no flux of any kind. P41
  14. Cutting Iron: "I hooked the Browns Gas to the red hose, normally the acetylene hose, and I hooked the oxygen hose to a compressed oxygen bottle, with regulator set to 20psi. I was using a 1-3 cutting tip. When the iron was hot enough to cut, I depressed the lever and shot oxygen onto the metal IT WORKED GREAT "(authors italics)
  15. Steel can be cut with Brown’s Gas. The smaller the torch the better,gives a very thin cut. P41
  16. Welding Copper " The Brown’s Gas easily welded copper,using plain copper rod. P42
  17. Welding Aluminum: " I have gotten good results with aluminum using the type of rods that have flux inside it"p42
  18. Brazing: "I have had no trouble brazing at any time. The Brown’s Gas seems to braze as well as oxy-acet.
  19. Cost to Operate Compared to Oxy-Acetylene: p42 " Here we are paying about 4 cents per kilowatt hour.(Canada) Our 2500 Liter/hr electrolyzer draws about 10 kwh. This is 40 cents. At present, this electrolyzer uses about one liter per hour of di stilled water,when producing gas at 2500 liters per hour. I buy my water at 25cents/liter. Total cost per hour=65 cents. I bought my own little oxygen (50 cubic feet) and acetylene(40 cubic feet) bottles years ago. The deal is,I exchange these bottles f or full ones whenever I need more gas, paying for the gas but not paying rent on the bottles. It so happens that if I use my bottles down to dangerously low pressures, I can get 2500 liters of volume out of them. So, if I use gas at 2500 L/h, I can get o ne hour of use. It costs me $52 to fill these bottles. So, total cost per hour is $52. Thus my cost to operate the Brown’s Gas torch is nearly 99% less. …If I was paying `18 cents per kilowatt hour to operate the Brown’s Gas torch, it would cost $2.05/ hour to operate. (distilled water included) This would be 96% less operating cost. p42.
  20. Brown’s Gas is an exact mixture of two hydrogen and one oxygen in their atomic molecular form, written 2H0. I often call this mon-atomic to differentiate from "normal" hydrogen and oxygen gas in their di-atomic form , written as 2H 2:O2. At omic (or mon-atomic) H and O are COMPLETELY different from di-atomic H2 and O2. pp.43
  21. "It is very important for experimenters to realize that Brown’s Gas has properties and operating characteristics completely different from ‘ordinary’ di-atomic hydrogen and oxygen mixtures. I cannot express the DIFFERENCE enough times because th is is a common mistake for people looking at Brown’s Gas to use ‘ordinary’ hydrogen formulaes and logic to interpet the Brown’s Gas properties and characteristics. Using "ordinary" di-atomic calculations will give the wrong answers for this mon -atomic gas. P45.
  22. The first characteristic that astonishes everyone familiar with di-atomic hydrogen is Brown’s Gas IMPLOSIVE nature; when burned in its pure mixture, Brown’s gas forms a VACUUM of high quality. Of course, a diatomic mixture will make a vacuum to, but t here will be an explosion and then an implosion. Brown’s Gas has only implosion. p.45
  23. Because of the implosive characteristics of the Brown’s Gas flame, the actual welding takes place in a vacuum. Anyone who has welded with a TIG or MIG welder knows how important an inert (oxygen free) gas enviornment can be to a we ld. Welding in a vacuum is considerably better, but previously required equipment beyond the means of the average shop. Welding in a vacuum is not possible for everyone. p. 45
  24. Brown’s Gas flame temperature changes when it is applied to various materials. The Brown’s Gas flame is about 275 degrees F(135 degrees C) in open air. Without any torch adjustment, applying the flame to aluminum causes the aluminum to heat to 1295 de grees F(702 degrees C). Applied to brick, the temperature reaches 3,100 degrees F. (1704 degrees C) [James, I have seen aluminum welded to aluminum and brick melted with the torch, yet I passed my hand through the flame without any burns! I have the weld ed aluminum sample to show/give you but have forgotten about it.)p.45
  25. Brown’s Gas can cut materials that ordinary torches cannot touch, like iron oxide. Because the Brown’s Gas flame instantly causes the material to raise ITS OWN temperature until it is sufficient to melt or burn itself.
  26. Brown’s Gas can cause changes in the molecular structure of some materials. For example,melting a chip of ordinary fire brick creates a stone with a hardness of 9.5, almost as hard as diamond.(I have not repeated this experiment yet.) [nb: saw it bein g done in private demo in Rochester-gwt] Brown’s gas can be used to glaze surfaces(I have done this-Wiseman)p46.
  27. Brown’s Gas power potential is much greater than 50,000btu/lb. This is the power of normal 2H2O2. P48.
  28. Comparison of Chinese BN1000E torch to George Wiseman’s design & critique: pp49-50


  30. There is no established theory to explain the phenomenon of Brown’s Gas. P7.
  31. Residence address of Dr. Yul Brown: 5063 Dunsmore Avenue, Encino, CA. 91436 pp8.
  32. Notes on transformerless design: " I placed a full wave bridge rectifier across the electrolyzer and fed it with 120VAC but I put a current limiting capacitor in the AC line, in series. Tbis worked extrodinarily well, for several reasons. I found , using the current limiting capacitor that my voltage across the actual electrolyzer was reduced to exactly that needed to push the current across the plates! This meant I could get my voltage reduction without a transformer!. Later, I discovered that t his technique was not only more efficient than using a transformer, but the electrolysis effect was made more efficient by the peculiar wave form that this particular circuit causes. Apparently, the pulsating action of this particular circuit is very impo rtant to the production of Brown’s Gas. The pulsing prevents a particular reaction from taking place that would take place with continuous current.(see step #4) p10
  33. Brown’s Gas must be formed with as little voltage as possible p11.
  34. Compared to ‘normal’ electrolysis, there is a lack of heat in the elecrtrolyzer when Brown’s Gas is being formed p19 "If your electrolyzer stays fairly cool during heavy power, you are likely making Brown’s Gas. I have discovered that most heat that is generated in an electrolyzer comes from the manufacture of di atomic hydrogen and oxygen. ‘Browns Gas’ generation is purely an endothermic reaction. You are putting electrical energy in, and you should be getting no other energy out. This makes B rown’s Gas generators extremely efficient.lp29
  35. For an explanation-very important to your colleagues-see "Theory Of Brown’s Gas" See pages 18-20. I have not typed this here, because it would take up too much time and space. Let George speak for himself.
  36. An "ordinary" H2 and O2 flame produces three times less radiant energy than a hydrocarbon flame (methane, propane,etc.) With Brown’s Gas there is very little radiant energy because the flame does’ent need it to progagate itself. This makes Brown’s Gas easier and safer to work with. P29.
  37. Ordinary hydrogen (H2) is a very small molecule. H is even smaller and escapes most containers easily by bouncing between the molecules of the container. p.29
  38. The basic essence: ABSTRACT from Yull Brown’s Patents. "This invention relates to welding, brazing, or the like utilizing a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen generated in substantially stoichometric proportions in an electrolytic cell by electrolytic dissociation of water, the mixture so generated being passed from the generator through a flash back arrestor and thence to a burner where the gases are ignited. The invention also relates to atomic welding in which the abov e mentioned mixture is passed through an arc causing dissociation of both the hydrogen and oxygen into atomic hydogen and oxygen which on recombination generate an intensely hot flame" The identical Abstract appear on Yul Brown’s patents 4,014,777 a nd 4,081,656. [note: the italic portions deal with George Wiseman’s development-he did not make use of an electric arc]
  39. The following is an ex cerpt from an Internet download on Brown’s Gas from Austrailia: THE DISCOVERY OF BROWN'S GAS Born in 1922 in Bulgaria, Yull Brown went to Australia in 1958 as an electrical engineer with a deep belief that Jules Verne’s vision o f "There is fire in water", could be realized. He worked as an unknown laboratory technician until he could develop his own laboratory. By 1978 Professor Brown was being described by The Australian Post as "the most talked about inventor in Australia toda y". He discovered in the early 1970's a proprietary method of water electrolysis that yields a nonexplosive mixture of hydrogen and oxygen gas in the precise atom-to-atom ratio of two volumes of hydrogen to one volume of oxygen. Professor Yull Brown disco vered that hydrogen and oxygen gas can be safely mixed (plus or minus 5 percent) if that ration is strictly maintained. The result is Brown's Gas, a hydrogen and oxygen mixture that can be economically generated, compressed, and used safely. In Professor Brown's process, the hydrogen and oxygen gases are immediately and intimately mixed at exactly the right ratio (the scientific term is "stoichiometric mix"). Brown's Gas is produced within an electrolysis cell, without membranes and with safety, inve nted by Professor Brown.

One of the design features of the gas generator is that its electrodes consist of inexpensive, ordinary mild steel,

unlike many conventional electrodes that employ expensive, exotic noble metals. (Noble metals are chemically

inert or inactive, especially toward oxygen). There are extraordinary characteristics of Brown's Gas when

produced by the patented generator. The properties of the gas have been the subject of considerable international

interest and various research projects and third party reports. The first Australian Patent 590309 was granted to

Yull Brown in 1977. U.S. Patent 4014777 was granted in 1977 and U.S. Patent 4081656 was granted in 1978. Yull

Brown has the intellectual rights to Brown's Gas. These rights are his for fifty years and are far from expired.

While a person could build a machine from the original patent, they would not be allowed to produce Brown's Gas

without Yull Brown's written approval, which has been exclusively granted to Better World Technology for the

United States. Many of the larger industrialized countries have granted patents or offer protection through

international treaties. (A strategy of patent enhancement that may further extend the life of U.S. patents is

presently in development.) With the initial granting of patents, emphasis was placed on documentation and

analysis of the properties, behavior and safety of the gas. Commercial development of the widespread potential

applications was not a principal focus until 1986.


The raw materials for the production of Brown's Gas are water and electricity. One kwh of electricity produces

approximately 340 liters of gas.

Virtually any amount of Brown's Gas can be produced in any volume through cells in series, cells

miniaturized, or cells enlarged. One unit of water yields 1,860 units of gas. The inverse applies as well. Upon

ignition, Brown's Gas implodes. When implosion of the gas mixture occurs, the result is a 1,859 unit vacuum with

one unit of water. Tests have demonstrated various potential applications for pumps and motors operating as a

result of the vacuum created by igniting the gas in a closed chamber. The end result of the implosion is always

water. The effect of the gas's self implosion is to create a nearly perfect vacuum, almost instantaneously. The

vacuum can be generated in a device without moving parts. A standard torch, such as used in oxy/actetylene

welding, can be used to burn Brown's Gas. Ignition is achieved with a hot spark. There are remarkable properties

to the flame that are considerably different from a flame produced by mechanically combining oxygen and hydrogen gases. It appears that the unique nature of the extreme thermal energy produced by Brown's Gas is from interactive effects with the particu lar material being heated. Hydrogen burning in an oxygen environment should theoretically reach a temperature of between 2210 and 2900 degrees centigrade. Tungsten was vaporized (sublimated) which requires a temperature of 5900 degrees centigrade, consid erably above the flame temperature. A section of tungsten rod (1/8 inches in diameter) was sublimated in about 30 seconds. The flames properties are different from those of conventional welding gases. For example, the flame is exceedingly pure and the fl ame results from the burning of the gas without the addition of oxygen, as required for acetylene. When the gas flame is directed to a fire brick, the contact area quickly reaches a condition of white heat and then begins to melt. Such results are not obs ervable with conventional welding gases. In various demonstrations of the burning of Brown's Gas, holes were thermally bored through bricks, bricks were welded together with the material melting to an igneous rock similar to volcanic material, ceramic til es were pierced by the flame, and steel was welded to brick. An observable characteristic of the implosive flame is that it concentrates heat into a small area. Various independent consultants have tested this aspect by holding a piece of mild steel (six inches long) in one bare hand, and using the flame, cutting an inch or more from the other end. The cutting operation is completed before heat is significantly conducted through the metal. Welders familiar with conventional welding devices would assume t he absolute requirement of asbestos gloves for such an experiment.

The intense heat concentration of the flame is immensely important in welding certain metals where the conducted overflow heat can weaken the metal adjacent to a weld. A typical example would involve aluminum welding. With Brown's Gas, the heat energy is concentrated into a small area where it performs its function without a wide dispersal of the applied heat. In applications which involve roll cutting steel plate, the smoothness of the cut is significant, in part because of this characteristic of grea ter heat concentration.


There have been supportive studies and conclusions reached about Professor Brown's discovery by various independent authorities and consultants. Some of those are summarized below.

Dr. C.D. Ellyett, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Newcastle University, N.S.W., Australia, prepared an independent technical assessment of Professor Brown's technology in 1986 . Dr. Ellyett has a double masters in chemistry and physics and a Ph.D. in physics. He was Foundation Professor of Physics at the University of Newcastle from 1964 to 1980,. specializing in geophysics. He is the author of 64 articles in various profession al journals and has been consultant to the U.S. government in upper atmospheric and space physics. He has lectured in the USA Sweden, Antarctica, South Africa, Holland, Canada, Singapore, the Philippines, West Germany and Finland. In preparing his observ ations of the Brown’s Gas Generator, Dr. Ellyett went through several demonstrations of the technology, reviewed the U.S. patent, and also reviewed three reports prepared by Dr. John Bockris, various technical reports supplied by a large Australian industrial firm (prepared in 1976), a report by Caltex Oil (1979), and two Australian consultant’s report (1979 and 1983). Dr. Ellyett noted that Professor Brown's Gas was considerably different in properties from a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen. He wrote: "The resulting differences are so unexpected that they raise initial skepticism in many technically trained people, including the present author, but the weight of demonstration for ces its acceptance.

"It should be stated here that the study of uses and applications has gone ahead of a complete scientific understanding

of all facets of this process. Such a study will probably take several years to complete. However, enough has now

been demonstrated to justify the techniques being commercialized immediately, and the first country to do so may in

the long run achieve an enormous advantage in many technical processes.Brown's Gas is burnt in a blowtorch. The

oxygen combines with the hydrogen itself, and as much energy is released on recombination as was needed to

produce the initial dissociation. This results in a high temperature.The product is water. Surrounding air and its

associated moisture is excluded so the temperature is not lowered due to this factor, as it can be with other flames.

However, at the high temperatures reached, some of the resulting water

is again probably dissociated and hydrogen will interact to varying degrees with the material being heated.

The extent of creation of atomic hydrogen and oxygen is presently unknown, but complex reactions occur within

the flame and between the flame and the solid, so that some materials being heated reach greater temperatures than


Dr. Ellyett, in reporting on various welding applications of the gas wrote: "Metal welding, including aluminum, become simple processes. Metal welds are particularly clean, due to the correct hydrogen/oxygen balance". Regarding the stability of the ga s, he wrote: "It is stable and non-explosive at any reasonable pressure, and has been approved for manufacture and use by the New South Wales Department of Explosives. Any simple mixture of the two gases would probably explode if it was significantly comp ressed, but Brown's Gas is stable in this regard". Regarding the self-implosion characteristic of the gas, Dr. Ellyett noted, "If a spark plug is inserted in the gas and a spark passed, the gas immediately collapses to water with an 1860 to 1 reduction in volume. This creates a near vacuum and opens the way to many interesting, practical uses, such as the pumping of water or other fluids in emergency situations, using the surrounding atmosphere to move the fluid". Dr. Ellyett also wrote: "The gas generat or can produce the gas rapidly as it is required. This obviates the need for heavy storage cylinders, with all the cost factors of transport to and from the working site. "Alternatively, if storage is required, it can be achieved quite simply in the fiel d. Noncontinuous generators of electricity, such as solar photovoltarc cells or windmills, could create the Brown's Gas by electrolysis of water, and the gas could be stored as a source of energy for use at any future time. This would be particularly adva ntageous in remote areas, and would eliminate the use of storage batteries.


"Study of the calculations for the production of Brown's Gas by electrolysis indicates a highly efficient process; 1 kwh of electricity producing 340 liters of gas. Direct current is used for the electrolysis, so there is a small energy loss in convert ing from alternating current. The electrolysis itself is considered to be approximately 95% efficient, so the overall efficiency from an alternating current source is calculated to be in excess of 90%. The cost of Brown's Gas appears from observation a nd calculation to be many times cheaper than the cost of obtaining a similar quantity of bottled oxyacetylene or oxyhydrogen gases on-site.(see George Wiseman’s Observations) Dr. John Bockris prepared comments following a comprehensive review and de monstration of Professor Brown's generator and the various heat and implosion characteristics of the gas. Dr. Bockris has a PH.D. from the University of London who was appointed to the Department of Chemistry at Imperial College, London in 1945. He organi zed a team of professors in electrode processes at Imperial College that resulted in significant new contributions to the field. In 1953 he was appointed a professor at the University of Pennsylvania, where he formed and led the Electrochemistry Laborator y and another team that made additional advances in the field of electrochemistry. In 1972 he became a professor at The Flinders University in Adelaide, Australia, where he continued his studies in photo-electrochemistry and the potential for a hydrogen e conomy. Dr. Bockris is a founding member of the International Society of Electrochemistry and the International Association of Hydrogen Energy. He is an associate editor of four international energy journals, the author of several hundred research papers and some dozen books. He is widely considered a world authority on hydrogen and its potential use as an energy source. Dr. Bockris prepared several research reports on Professor Brown's invention. In his July 1977 report, he observed the following: "I w itnessed the welding of stainless steel. I also saw the hydrogen/oxygen mixture which came from the generator driving an internal combustion engine. Dr. Bockris concluded in an August 1977 report, "I should think that a company making this device could t ake over the entire welding market in a few years, possible worldwide."

He continued to write about Professor Brown's invention in a report in 1978. He stated that, "there was no doubt whatsoever that the things which Mr. Yull Brown talks about are genuine." This was a letter to the Livestock & Grain Producer's Associa tion of New South Wales. He had been asked to comment on the potential of using Professor Brown's technology for running tractors and farm machinery. He wrote: "As a Scientist who operates largely overseas, and has spent most of his life in the UK and the U.S., I am utterly flabbergasted that Mr. Yull Brown's inventions have lasted so long without their being exploited by Australian concerns. The general situation of Mr. Brown's inventions-the production of hydrogen from water, and the use of hydrogen as a fuel--is almost certainly some big part of the future..."

The Australian Welding Research Association issued a formal report on Professor Brown's Gas generator and its applications in 1977. The Association's study, which reviewed ope rational costs relative to oxyacetylene operational costs, stated: "In terms of costs of operation, even when an electrical inefficient welding transformer is employed, (Professor Brown's generator) is less expensive to operate than oxyacetylene..." The W elding Research Association indicated that "the production of explosive gas mixtures poses potential dangers. It is observed, however, that these have been given considerable attention in the design of the hydrogen/oxygen apparatus, which has received the approval of the appropriate authorities in New South Wales..."

Gerard P. Martins is a ten-year professor of metallurgy at the Colorado School of Mines. Mr. Martins prepared this report based in his visit and observation of a Brown's Gas d emonstration of May 16, 1986;

Characteristics and Interactions of Flame with Solid Materials

A. A piece of 1/16" thick mild steel sheet was cut by 'burn through' of the steel as the torch was moved transversely across the sheet.

B. The flame was directed onto the surface of a refractory brick. An intense, bright spot was produced over the impingement region between the flame and the brick. Localized melting occurred and a glazed spot was observed on the brick.

C. The end of a piece of 1/8" diameter high alumina rod (melting point 2020 degrees C.), supplied by me, was contacted with the flame. The end 'melted' back to form a globule of molten material.

D. The end of a 1/8" wide strip of 0.010" thick tantalum (melting point 2996 degrees C.) metal sheet, also supplied by me, was contacted with the flame. A liquid phase was produced as the end of the strip 'melted' back.

"From the above qualitative observations, I concluded that the temperature, which was produced when the flame contacted these materials, could be as high as 6000 degrees C. based on the observations with tantalum, (d). The work melted as it appears i n the above observation is used cautiously, since it is possible that chemical compounds could be formed during the contact with the flame, thus resulting in a melting point different to that of the original material. In addition, high luminosity was only produced when the flame contacted the surface of the materials tested."

Clifford E. Sawyer prepared a report on Professor Brown's Gas mixture in May 1986. Mr. Sawyer has national certificates in engineering and sciences and graduated from the Mili tary College of Science prior to active service with the Canadian Army. He spent 22 years with the Ford Motor Company with broad manufacturing and senior management responsibilities. He also spent five years as vice president of industrial development at Brascan Ltd., with responsibility for the diversification of the Toronto-based multinational energy company. He is presently the president of Wespac Planning Corporation, with consulting assignments related to strategic planning and project evaluation for various companies, government agencies, and ministries. He serves as director for various publicly listed resources and manufacturing companies.


Mr. Sawyer observed Professor Brown's Gas demonstration over a two-week period. His report made the following comments: "In terms of usable energy sources, hydrogen offers a practical potential of more than 50,000 BTUs per pound compared, for example, to most coal, in the range of 10,000 to 12,000 BTUs per pound, and gasoline, in the 16,000 BTU-per-pound range. The problem which, in the past, has inhibited wider use of hydrogen as a viable fuel has concerned its volatility and practical problems involv ed in preventing an accidental mixing of hydrogen and oxygen at the work area.

"There is convincing evidence that the combination of these two high potential energy gases has now been accomplished in Professor Brown's Gas to make available a safe and widely usable source of energy. The range of potential applications of the gas as an alternative energy source is extensive and will require considerable further research before all the opportunities can be described. Futhermore, it is likely that the effective utilization of the amazing implosion effect of Brown's Gas will require the development and engineering of some entirely new devices." However, additional time and expense for research and development is not anticipated in the case of flame welding and metal fabrication applications, where the very unusual qualities are believed to have the potential to impact the present practices and associated economics in a very substantial fashion. The utilization of the gas as a source of process heat could be accomplished within a shortened period of time because standard types o f welding and cutting equipment can be used as is or easily adapted. From the reported direct experience of users of Brown's Gas in Australia and New Zealand, it is apparent that all the regular flame welding and gas cutting functions are feasible. In a ddition, there are important cost saving advantages, particularly over the oxyacetylene and similar systems. For example, the delivered price of acetylene includes high distribution and delivery costs. It is premature to discuss specific policies with res pect to pricing and distribution for Professor Brown's Gas. However, it is anticipated that the use of water and electricity as the 'raw materials' and the probability that the gas will be generated at, or close to, the point of use, should facilitate a r easonably competitive and profitable cost structure. Another key advantage concerns safety. By nature, manufacture of the other commercial gases face problems of instability and are vulnerable to explosion after receiving the slightest shock. These gases are heavier than air, and if a leak occurs, the highly explosive gases will collect around the low point on the floor or in stairwells and are easily set off by a spark. In contrast, Brown's Gas is lighter than air and will easily disperse into the ambie nt air without help. Finally, in terms of quality work standards, the cut edges produced by the gas are similar to those using oxyacetylene cutting systems. The capability to produce the same heat reactions underwater without creating special atmosphere b ubbles will be of great significance to the field of underwater construction engineering. Ronald B. Davis has had the opportunity to work as Professor Brown's assistant for approximately six years in Australia. He has an undergraduate degree in mathemati cs from Sydney University and a masters degree from the University of New South Wales. He was a visiting professor to the University of California, Berkeley, and is presently a lecturer in mathematics at the University of New South Wales. Mr. Davis made t he following personal remarks about Professor Brown and his achievement;

"Some of the applications of the implosion action of Brown's Gas that could be researched include pumping, marine motors, the transportation ability potential as a primary fuel, and an energy source for rocket propulsion. Safe storage of hydrogen in a biatomic state with oxygen as a self-contained fuel is a scientific break through that will fuel transportation on the ground, under the sea, in the air, and into space in future generations. In my opinion, Yull Brown could be called a 'living treasure' a s described by the Japanese of their contemporaries having skills par excellence. Yull has the ability to mentally visualize very complicated atomic models at variance to the Bohr model,andto‘see’interactions which would require a new look at quantum phys ics."


The gas burns with a clear flame. The gas generator supplies gas at 280 - 320 k PA (40 to 60 psi). The flame contains hydrogen and oxygen and no other elements. The end product after burning = water (only H20). The gas burns through a variety of noz zle sizes and presently can have a flame length of up to 400 mm.


Theoretical flame temperature is 2,210 to 2,900 degrees C. However, it changes with different applications. Tests have been made which exceed 6,000 degrees C. Further tests have been conducted indicating in excess of 8,400 degrees C. (8,400 C. = 15,1 52 F.).

The flame produced when Brown's Gas is ignited under 40 to 60 psi pressure is initially yellow in color and quickly reverts to a neutral blue cone with a long extension of a pale red/blue flame. There are several distinct regions, called mantles, wit hin the flame's sheath. The remarkable property of this flame is that it is NOT formed as a set of explosions, but is formed as a set of implosions. Consequently, the classical theory of combustion products, highest temperature region and other specifics must be revised. The central blue cone is the region separating the inner sustained vacuum from the continuously forming implosion produced and it is in this narrow hand that the novel combustion situation is sustained.

All fuel types, including gasoline, LPG, butane, propane, diesel fuel and natural gas have constant combustion or burn temperatures. Brown's Gas flame, upon application to an element or compound of elements, changes its temperature due to an interact ive combustion property. This is the unique characteristic of Brown's Gas.

There is no theoretical temperature limit to the applied flame as the environment of the combustion will determine the extension of incremental calorific energy supplied. The outer mantles surrounding the blue cone region prevent oxygen from interfe ring in the combustion process. In fact, the mantles located within the central hot region form an inert substance as found in modern TIG and MIG welders.

In that each material, such as soil, rocks, metals or liquids have a different atomic makeup, each material will burn, liquefy or sublimate (turn into a gas form) at its own respective temperature. In each case, when Brown's Gas is administered to a ma terial, the temperature of the Brown's Gas changes. To date, the capability to define the high end temperature of generated by the gas has not been possible due to the lack of appropriate testing equipment.

The flame produced from this gas is capable of drilling holes in high-temperature refractory products in seconds. It turns brick to glass.

To illustrate the temperature range, it is possible, using the same gas flame pressure (with no change in flow rate) to both (1) successfully weld aluminum sheet without a gas envelope at 660 degrees C. and (2) sublimate (vaporize) tungsten at approxim ately 6,000 degrees C. Again, this is accomplished in seconds with the same flame with no increase in volume. (See the Video tape). The intriguing explanation for the large range of calorific response when the flame is applied to different materials is go verned by the rate of mono-atomic absorption of hydrogen on the surface of these materials. For example, when the flame is applied to aluminum, white heat isn't the immediate reaction as it is when applied to brick. Instead, the flame may be shown to prod uce water on the aluminum by condensing the steam in the mantles on this hard conductive surface. The reasons for this low temperature reaction are three-fold.

A) The flame temperature is not high in its natural state. B) The aluminum is a good conductor of heat. C) The hydrogen in the heated region is only mildly absorbed into the aluminum.

However, when the flame is applied to tungsten, the heated metal surface readily absorbs mono-atomic hydrogen, thus releasing the additional calorific energy obtained from the interactive division and absorption as subsequent surfaces of the metal are exposed to the applied flame. The process accelerates under the high temperature build-up, coupled with the shielding effect of the surrounding mantles of water which, incidentally, are poor absorbers of hydrogen.

The salient features of this combustion process are that nascent hydrogen is readily absorbed in most elements, and especially when this reaction occurs with a neutral flame and water is re-cycles through dissociation caused at elevated temperatures wi thin that environment.


DC power conversion efficiency to thermal energy of the produced gas is 95%. AC to DC conversion may be as high as 98%; so the maximum efficiency of the gas production from AC supply is 91.3%. A focal factor of this system is its ability to produce gas immediately (and cheaply) on demand as required. Inherent problems of storage and loss by leakage are not relevant. The neutral flame of the gas is important for welding and also as a clean heat source of energy capable of replacing fossil fuels.


Totally new vacuum technology is now possible using the implosion of Brown's Gas. The vacuum is produced with no contaminants whatsoever. No other technique for producing a vacuum of such a high purity in such a short period of time with inexpensive equipment exists. Cost of operation is an order of magnitude below existing vacuum systems.


If Brown's Gas is exposed to a heat source, it will expand. Implosion of this expanded gas will utilize atmospheric pressure. Numerous pumping applications and the development of atmospheric implosion motors are the result. Implosion, as a single react ion, only occurs with this gas and is impossible with other known substances! When Brown's Gas burns, it turns into water. When it is produced from water using electrolysis, it expands 1,860 to 1. Implosion is achieved with a high frequency spark of 9,00 0 Volts or higher. When subjected to electric ignition. it uniquely implodes (patented in March, 1990 after 8 years process time) producing a near perfect vacuum. Upon implosion, vacuum is 1,859. The remaining "1" becomes once again a pure form of water. Only a low decible "ping" accompanies the implosion. The speed of detonation (or burn rate) is greater than 3,600 meters per second. There is no contraction - expansion effect when the gas is imploded only contraction. Little heat is lost to the equipment in an implosion cycle. The low cost of gas production than ensures an inexpensive method for production of ultra high vacuum.


o 1,860 Liters of Brown's Gas.

1 Kwh creates = 340 Liters of Brown's Gas.

1,860 divided by 340 = 5.47 Kwh.

Example.- 5.47 Kwh X 0.084 cents = 0.459 cents for 1,860 Liters of Brown's Gas.

(NOTE: Cost per Kwh depending upon locality). Losses are dependent upon where DC energy is acquired.




Gerard P. Martins

Dept. of Metallurgical and Materials Engineering

Colorado School of Mines

1500 Illinois St.

Golden, Colorado - 80401

Ph. (303)-273-3780, Fax (303)-273-3795









Position: Professor, Metallurgical and Materials Engineering Department




Education: BSc University of London; PhD State University of New York at Buffalo




Research Interests: Process and extraction metallurgy; engineered ceramic and metal powders; electrochemical systems; corrosion




Phone: x3798 Lab: x3792



"Materials such as ceramics, metals, plastics, and composites, engineered to custom specifications, are high-value-added commodities. Technologies to achieve these needs are generally sophisticated, but nevertheless can be readily justified.




Abundant opportunities exist for students to become involved in this exciting field. They must, however, develop a strong fundamentals base in principles of engineering (that is, mathematical methods, physics, and chemistry) if they are to participate effectively. They must also be well versed in how these fundamentals are utilized in an engineering context.




My interests are primarily focused on educating students in both classroom and research environments. I joined CSM in 1969, and over the years I have developed a broad experience base which includes process and extraction metallurgy, electrochemical te chniques for deposition of coatings and evaluation of their corrosion and other performance characteristics, and techniques for synthesis of metal and ceramic powders.




I believe that the development of today's high-performance material is limited only by the imagination of the creative and well-educated engineer. I am delighted to be able to contribute to the Materials Science Program at CSM, which offers a truly exc eptional opportunity for those who accept the challenge to pursue graduate-level education."




<Picture: |HOME><Picture: |UP><Picture: |TEXT SEARCH><Picture: |HELP>


Cliff Ellyett address: PO Box 84, OURIMBAH NSW 2258

Phone:02 43 621 626=Prof. Ellyat’s telephone number

Fax: 02 43 622 044= Prof. Ellyat’s Fax number





>I would very much like to get in touch with Dr Ellyett.



>> From: June Oyston <>

>> To: felis catus <>

>> Subject: Re: Prof. Emititus CD Ellyett and 'Browns Gas'

>> Date: Monday, September 08, 1997 10:06 PM


>> Dear Sir,


>> Professor Cliff Ellyett retired from the University in 1980 and is no


>> involved with teaching or research in the Department of Physics. If you

>> wish I can put you in touch with him, and in the meantime, I will forward

>> your email on to him.






>> >Sir/Madame:

>> > I am doing research on the phenomena of 'Browns Gas' a

>> >stoichometric mixture of monatomic hydrogen and oxygen invented by Yull

>> >Brown in Australia. Your colleague, Professor Emiterus CD Ellyatt was

>> >involved with the testing of Brown's Gas. Is he still active in


>> >and is there any way we could contact him? Are any of your other


>> >involved with research in Brown's Gas?

>> >

>> >

>> >

>> >email:

>> >

>> >



>> June Oyston Email -


>> Departmental Secretary FAX - (049) 21 6907

>> Department of Physics Phone - (049) 21 5440

>> University of Newcastle

>> Newcastle, NSW 2308 Australia







June Oyston Email -

Departmental Secretary FAX - (049) 21 6907

Department of Physics Phone - (049) 21 5440

University of Newcastle

Newcastle, NSW 2308 Australia


Dear Sir,


Professor Cliff Ellyett retired from the University in 1980 and is no longer

involved with teaching or research in the Department of Physics. If you

wish I can put you in touch with him, and in the meantime, I will forward

your email on to him.







> I am doing research on the phenomena of 'Browns Gas' a

>stoichometric mixture of monatomic hydrogen and oxygen invented by Yull

>Brown in Australia. Your colleague, Professor Emiterus CD Ellyatt was

>involved with the testing of Brown's Gas. Is he still active in research,

>and is there any way we could contact him? Are any of your other colleagues

>involved with research in Brown's Gas?








June Oyston Email -

Departmental Secretary FAX - (049) 21 6907

Department of Physics Phone - (049) 21 5440

University of Newcastle

Newcastle, NSW 2308 Australia




Hypergas- Yoshiro Nakamatsu has been able to generate what you call hypergas. I scanned in a newspaper article about his invention, but this did not copy over into html. He exhibited his invention in 1990, and I assume he has a Japanese patent on it. I could not search the database- the search engine I used does not go back that far. Examples of his other Japanese patents cited here, and work by another American inventor on "hypergas".




<Picture: News Review>Welcome to the News Review archive of UK business and company news.


Your search engine has brought you to this archive because it holds extensive news, comment and information on many companies active in the United Kingdom.




Our database includes synopses of current financial news and comment from the leading UK newspapers, trade magazines and periodicals such as The Investors Chronicle. The article below is one of those that has matched your search criteria.






<Picture: The Observer>






Sunday 25 Feb 1996




Profile: Yoshiro Nakamatsu


Kevin Rafferty profiles the amazing Dr `NakaMats', lateral thinking inventor of the floppy disc, an uncharacteristically inventive Japanese who holds more patents than anyone else alive or dead.




Page reference from newspaper [p. B7]










Information is available to registered readers in a variety of electronic formats including an automated clipping service to help you monitor your selected companies or business sectors. With its publishing partners, News Review is building a comprehen sive overview of reporting on the UK business scene to include newspapers, trade magazines and European publications.




News Review is trusted by professional and private investors and business readers around the world as an aid to decision-making in fast-moving markets.




We provide a variety of low cost subscription based services to take advantage of the Internet and electronic delivery.




Please use the Free Trial registration form


<Picture: Free Trial>


See why News Review has become one of the leading Internet services








Published in conjunction with Weekend City Press Review


Developed and Managed by Information Providers Limited






























(11) Publication number : 09019174 A

(43) Date of publication of application: 17.01.97










(51) Int.Cl




H02N 6/00

H01L 31/04

H02J 7/35

H02N 11/00









(21) Application number : 07193975


(22) Date of filing : 26.06.95




(71) Applicant :









(72) Inventor :



















(57) Abstract:


PURPOSE: To make the efficiency of AC generation high and to prolong the lives of cells, by providing a capacitor or battery in parallel to killed cells and storing energy, discharging it adding it to their output when the cells are made alive.


CONSTITUTION: Cells 4 and 5 for obtaining positive and reverse outputs by the irradiation of light, heat, cosmic energy, etc., are arranged on divided-into- four circles having a center at a shaft 12, and magnetic poles 14 having coils 13 for causing t heir currents to flow are provided corresponding to the cells arranged on the divided-into-four circles, and permanent magnets 15 which rotate around the shaft 12 as a center by attraction or repulsion corresponding to the magnetic poles 14 are arranged. Generated power of cells 17 is charged in a capacitor or battery when light to the cells 4 is shut, and generated power of cells 18 is charged in a capacitor or battery when light to the cells 5 is shut. When the cells 5 are irradiated the outputs of the cells 18 and discharge from the capacitor or battery flow into the coil 13. As the result, the lives become long since the cells do not deteriorate. Energy efficiency becomes high since an AC can be obtained directly without a converter.












<Picture: [Help]><Picture: [Home]><Picture: [Boolean Search]><Picture: [Advanced]><Picture: [Number Search]><Picture: [Order Copy]><Picture: [PTDLs]>








  <Picture: [Next Patent]><Picture: [Back to List]>( 1 of 6 )




United States Patent 4,987,896NakamatsuJan. 29, 1991




Apparatus for increasing the activity of the human brain


Inventors: Nakamatsu; Yoshiro (1-10-309, Minami Aoyama 5-chome, Minato-ku, Tokyo, JP). Appl. No.: 395,290Filed: Aug. 17, 1989








Related U.S. Application Data


Continuation of (including streamline cont.) Ser. No. 188,200, Apr. 28, 1988, abandoned, which is a continuation of Ser. No. 608,918, May 10, 1984, abandoned, which is a continuation of Ser. No. 317,205, Nov. 2, 1981, abandoned.








Foreign Application Priority Data


Mar. 28, 1981 [JP] 56-447Jul. 30, 1981 [JP] 56-118Aug. 6, 1981 [JP] 56-122Aug. 6, 1981 [JP] 56-122Aug. 6, 1981 [JP] 56-122Aug. 6, 1981 [JP] 56-122Intl. Cl. : A61F 7/00Current U.S. Cl.: 607/109; 128/897; 607/111Field of Search: 128/399-400, 402-3, 380, 382, 897; 165/43, 96; 237/12.3 A, 12.3 B




References Cited | [Referenced By]






U.S. Patent Documents


3,696,814Oct., 1972Umemoto128/3803,916,988Nov., 1975Matsuda165/96 X4,002,175Jan., 1977Brainard et al.128/3994,108,376Aug., 1978Matsuda et al.237/12.3 X4,109,661Aug., 1978Fukuoka128/5824,172,454Oct., 1979Warncke et al.128/399 X4,192,297Mar., 1980LaBrecq ue128/664,214,588Jul., 1980Byler128/403 X4,330,892May, 1982Fukushima600/15 X








Foreign Patent Documents


0652942Mar., 1979SU128/4000760972Sept., 1980SU128/400






Other References












Consumer Guide 1989 cars, pp. 21-23.






Primary Examiner: Cohen; Lee S.


Assistant Examiner: Lacyle; J. P.


Attorney, Agent or Firm: Jordan and Hamburg




















This invention provides an apparatus for increasing the activity of the human brain which includes a section for cooling the head of a person and another section for warming his feet or legs.








10 Claims, 75 Drawing Figures








  <Picture: [Next Patent]><Picture: [Back to List]>( 1 of 6 )




















(word processor parameters LM=8, RM=75, TM=2, BM=2)


Taken from KeelyNet BBS (214) 324-3501


Sponsored by Vangard Sciences


PO BOX 1031


Mesquite, TX 75150






on duplicating, publishing or distributing the


files on KeelyNet!




August 12, 1991








This file shared with KeelyNet courtesy of Chris Lightener.






Inventor Planning Hydrogen-Powered Car




By Robert Lindsey


(Special to The York Times)




Los Angeles, April 20 - Sam Leslie Leach, the inventor of a


controversial process that he contends can economically separate the


hydrogen and oxygen in water, says he has refined his design and


begun building a system that will be capable of running an


automobile on hydrogen derived from water.




Mr. Leach's invention has been the subject of both mystery and


controversy since he said in 1976 that he had devised an


economically efficient means of splitting water, a contention that


promised a cheap source of hydrogen as a replacement for fossil






Mr. Leach, a multimillionaire professional inventor who has


several basic patents in the field of optics, has been trying to


interest the Federal Government and industry in his concept for more


than three years, but has been largely ignored.




For the most part, scientists have ridiculed the concept,


arguing that it violated basic laws of physics. Any system of


splitting water, they contend, has to consume more energy than it






Positive Evaluation




Mr. Leach has refused to discuss the details of his system or


how it purportedly works. but last spring an innovation research


center at the University of Oregon financed by the National Science


Foundation evaluated part of the technology over a period of two


weeks and concluded that, that based on its analysis, it did not


violate the laws of physics or thermodynamics.




The center said that the process appeared to be technically


sound and have commercial potential, but its report did not dampen


skepticism in the scientific community.








Page 1












Two critics of the system, Howard Riese and Donald Bunker, both


professors at the University of California, argued, for example,


that it was impossible for such a system to work as Mr. Leach


contends because, in effect, it would be a "perpetual motion


machine." The inventor denies such a characterization.




In an interview, Mr. Leach said that he had declined to make


public any details until he had protected his rights to the process.


Last fall, he received a patent on some elements of the process.


Last week a second was issued by the United States Patent Office.


After its issuance he agreed to give some details of how the system


purportedly works.




How System Operates




In its simplest terms, he said, the process utilizes a


lazer-like device to generate ultraviolet radiation that


photochemically splits steam into oxygen and hydrogen. It then


utilizes the electrostatic forces that normally bind electrons and


protons in water vapor (and which are released in the water-


splitting action) to maintain the reaction.




In 1922, Niels Bohr, the Danish theoretical physicist, first


defined the electrostatic forces that bind electrons and protons as


"extranuclear" energy. Mr. Leach's contention that he has found a


way to use the energy in the way he describes is likely to evoke


additional skepticism from other scientists.




But he asserts that the process he utilizes to maintain the


water-splitting action is identical with one observed by astronomers


in energy interactions that occur in gaseous nebulae, the great


masses of interstellar gas that absorb ultraviolet radiation from


stars and re-emit it as visible light.




The following is a more detailed account of how Mr. Leach says


the system works:




The reaction is started with an input of electrical energy from


outside the system, from a battery or electric line. This


energy is converted, by using an "optical pump" and other


components, into large amounts of ultraviolet radiation of a


specific wavelength that is precisely tailored to ionize


hydrogen and oxygen molecules in the steam that has been fed


into a tubular reaction chamber.




The chamber is flooded with the radiation. During the


ionization, electrons are momentarily liberated from their


atoms and molecules.




Ionization and Radiation




Microseconds later they are recaptured and recombined with the


proton or nucleus of the atom. At this point, the energy that was


required to ionize it reappears and radiates away.




This radiation then ionizes another molecule. Very soon a chain


reaction begins that involves millions of molecules and atoms.




The process's concept, Mr. Leach said, manipulates the




Page 2












recombination of electrons and protons as hydrogen and oxygen


instead of water vapor. Some of the hydrogen, he said, can be used


to generate electricity to continue the initial input to the process








In 1975, before he publicized his work, the Presley companies,


a southern California home builder, acquired an option on the


process from Mr. Leach for use in home heating. The Securities and


Exchange Commission investigated the company and alleged that it had


issued false statements regarding its capabilities. Subsequently,


Mr. Leach reacquired the option for the same price Presley paid for






Mr. Leach asserted that he had demonstrated the validity of his


theory in 11 experimental machines that split water into hydrogen


and oxygen. He said that the machine now being built for use in an


automobile was of a more sophisticated design and was intended to


drive a 245-horsepower automobile.




A spokesman for a company that is assembling the device under a


contract with Mr. Leach said it was hoped the machine would be ready


for testing in early summer.




Scientists have tried for more than a century to separate water


into its two components, oxygen and hydrogen. Electrolysis, nuclear


reactors and other means have been employed to do so, but every


method has consumed far more energy that the hydrogen that was






The availability of a cheap source of hydrogen would have


immense implications for the world economy. Not only could hydrogen


be used as a substitute for gasoline, but it would also be used as a


replacement for home heating fuels and other energy sources.




NYT April 21,1979








If you have comments or other information relating to such topics


as this paper covers, please upload to KeelyNet or send to the


Vangard Sciences address as listed on the first page.


Thank you for your consideration, interest and support.




Jerry W. Decker.........Ron Barker...........Chuck Henderson


Vangard Sciences/KeelyNet






If we can be of service, you may contact


Jerry at (214) 324-8741 or Ron at (214) 242-9346






















Page 3