https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ax8poDiWmco

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRSHU0Ybymc

I would notified the extraction solvent diffuses more easily inside the small particles

to extract  molecules.

thanks for your answers. but is i-H2O meant ionized water?. and I want to make a solvent to dissolve Al acetate and i want to know how to prepare i-H2O to dissolve Al acetate. 

Dear Milad,

According to the literature, during the automated i-H2O activation process, the chaotic structure of water molecules is transformed into a single-file alignment, mimicking the body's own natural state of healthy cell water, thereby creating optimally energized, bio-available water. The process is patented.

With my best regards

Ms A V Gumte

This is the first time I have seen this type of grey literature creep into research gate.  I think I am being generous when I call it grey literature.  When I review information about  touting the benefits it makes no sense at all.  Terms like energized, life giving, alignment have no meaning in chemistry.  Its all crap.

Dear Angus,

you are absolutely right. Typical example of pseudoscience. Give at least one reference to a peer review journal supporting the existence of i-H2O. "Some books," "according to the literature," "the process is patented," references on youtube.

Angus is right, Its all crap. I downvoted  all comments and upvoted Angus answer. 

Indeed:

http://www.chem1.com/CQ/clusqk.html

But, let the marketing companies on the youtube defend their innovation..

The variants of water as vapour or liquid are isotopic isomers and are properly distinguished by the appropriate sum of the protons and neutrons in the nucleus or nuclei of the constituent atoms, written as numerical superscripts attached to and preceding the appropriate atomic symbols, for example 2H218Ofor the heaviest stable (non-radioactive) water isomer, molecular weight = 22.  When dealing with ice, there many stable or metastable forms, depending on temperature and pressure, which may be described by an adjective - hexagonal, cubic, amorphous - descriptive of the crystal structure or lack of it. At higher pressures, phase description is often via an upper case Roman numeral, e.g. ice-VI. Non-scientific deviations are greatly to be deplored, whether originating with popularisers, engineers or even people purporting to be scientists. And certainly Apple have nothing to do with it! i-water, indeed .....

Have a fun reading this:

http://skeptophilia.blogspot.com/2013/10/deep-waters.html

Thankyou for the vote of confidence Yurii,  I am happy to see so many people calling these snake oil salesmen out on the mat.  I do however take exception to Adrian's comment "Non-scientific deviations are greatly to be deplored, whether originating with popularisers, engineers or even people purporting to be scientists."  I am an engineer and a scientist and would not lump them into a group comprising popularisers or people purporting to be scientists.

thanks alot for your responding.

best regards

Milad

I was twice downvoted! A good sign that I'm right. 

Dear Angus,

if an engineer designs a device without any understanding what is the science behind of the device and this device is used to fool people and make money, how you would call such engineer? 

Milad, 

you initiated this discussion. What do you think about i-H2O? What is your answer on your own question? 

Not all engineers, obviously. But I've seen some appalling rubbish from bad ones, and even, as we all know, fraud in publishing by scientists driven by the wrong motives. And non-scientific deviations are still to be deplored, without including honest and concerned people like you, Angus. I'm on your side.

Milad, I am aware that your question is not from health perspective. But, then 'ionized water', not 'i-H2O', as you explained earlier, has been in use historically. A simple google scholar search would give you ample published literature on it in standard journals. There are possibly some US patents too for the ionization apparatus. Wikipedia explains the diferrence well. Please search 'water ionizer'. Best,

Dear Pradeep;

This is from Wikipedia"

"There is no empirical evidence to support these claims, nor the claims that drinking ionized water will have a noticeable effect on the body.[5] Drinking ionized water or alkaline water does not alter the body's pH due to acid-base homeostasis.[3]"

This is from http://www.chem1.com/CQ/ionbunk.html

"You won't find anything about the benefits of alkaline water in any standard textbook on nutritional biochemistry, and anyone with training in physiology or biochemistry would consider the claims in favor of it ludicrous, but the alkaline/ionized water quacksters and promoters have woven a nexus of scientific-sounding nonsense and outright lies in order to convince a gullible and scientifically-naïve public that drinking partially electrolyzed water (produced by their over-priced "machines") is the key to health."

Web of science (the most respectable database) does not find anything if searching "ionized water health benefits." 

You state: "A simple google scholar search would give you ample published literature on it in standard journals." Please, provide references in peer reviewed (not standard) journals. 

Dear Professor,

I am not a chemist by profession, but I am very curious to know about the difference, since for the first time I heard about 'i-H2O'. But, with the debate rising, I see that Milad's question is not about 'alkalline' water (from health perspective), but applications of ionized water in applied chemistry / industry. A google scholar search did give me a lot of published papers. Some of them are given below. I did not go through them, but then I realised that Milad's question has some point, and needs to be answered. Students/researchers rely on 'research gate' to find some valid answers, and they should get them. He is asking the difference between water and ionized water. If there is no difference, let him be replied so.  Regards.

http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ja01313a034

http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/jap/17/5/10.1063/1.1707720

http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jp962761n

https://scholar.google.co.in/scholar?start=20&q=ionized+water&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5

https://scholar.google.co.in/scholar?start=30&q=ionized+water&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5

http://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2011/sc/c0sc00604a/unauth

http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ja01338a026

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2003/0062068.html

http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/j150506a011

http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jp811059z

http://jes.ecsdl.org/content/143/5/1632.short

https://www.google.com/patents/US5593554

https://www.google.com/patents/US5616221

https://www.google.com/patents/US5234563

https://www.google.com/patents/US5643406

There is no doubt that water is always ionized. It contains H+ (proton) and HO- hydroxide anion. The concentration of protons is measured in pH units. The product of concentrations (in M), [H+][HO-], is equal to 1e-14 (10^-14). The structure of liquid water is very complex. Non-ionized water DOES NOT exist. It does exist "de-ionized water," which is  water purified from dissolved salts. Therefore, the "ionized water" is actually meaningless. However,sometimes this term was used by respectable scientists studying  the properties and structure of water. Unfortunately,  this term, as well as i-H2O, are also used "in order to convince a gullible and scientifically-naïve public that drinking partially electrolyzed water (produced by their over-priced "machines") is the key to health" citation from "What is the difference between i H2O and H2O? - ResearchGate. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/post/what_is_the_difference_between_i_H2O_and_H2O#view=56a456a45cd9e3687a8b45b3 [accessed Jan 24, 2016]."

My major point in this discussion, that all scientific terms should be clearly defined and used accordingly. 

The anonymous downvoting is not the way in any discussion. Tell me where and why I'm wrong

Wow,this is a pretty vigorous discussion.  I agree with all the points Yurii made.  My mother believes in the health benefits of Kangan water which is one of these devices that "ionizes" water.  It costs $5K and the cartridges are $800 each.  I cannot convince her that it is snake oil. Interestingly,  I can tell comments made by traditionally trained chemists and "others" quite easily.  I don't believe real chemists believe any of this junk Science.  Keep up the good work Yurii,  your points are accurate and real.