Slashdot Mirror

How about a gun engine or a Bourke Engine? Now That is an alternative...

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Bourke_Engi ne
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Gun_Engine

Trying to tweak an already inefficient engine is futile; the time and energy outweighs the product...

Just a few pennies from my head...

It has come to bear with recent advancements in nanotechnolgoy that up to an 80% increase in solar cell power output is possible.
"Recent nanotechnology breakthroughs in regards to solar have promised new solar cell designs capable of capturing a much wider range of solar energy, which would be much more efficient at converting solar energy to electricity (approaching 60% efficiency), more versatile (able to be painted onto just about any surface), and less costly than today's solar technology. These nanotechnology advancements in solar energy technology appear to be finally advancing solar beyond it's initial silicon-based limitations."
http://peswiki.com/index.php/PowerPedia:Solar_Ener gy

How much will the power cost me?

Less per mile than gas.

What is this going to do to the power grid which has been known to collapse, famously with the northeast blackout and the rolling blackouts in California?

The added drain from the cars will hardly affect the power grid. Living in an area with blackouts could be a problem though, but that is hardly the fault of the car manufacturers?

What if I let my car sit for a week or two?

No problem.

Aren't these the batteries that tend to explode if you look at them funny?

You are approaching FUD here... Lithium batteries were unstable, but ten years ago the industri swithced to Lithium Ion batteries which are much safer. There is more research being done to further improve safety.

Just what does battery production do to the environment?

Short answer: Less than using gas.
Lead and cadmium batteries are not so good for the environment, but lithium is pretty ok.

We've got the plans for how to build the proof of concept of the Parallel Path technology here:

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Joseph_Flyn n's_Parallel_Path_technology

Fresh today.

It's not perpetual motion. It doesn't violate laws of physics. It does add a new rule to the textbook that will become a chapter in all electronics textbooks, and will be standard fare in all electric motors.

3.5-x the output as conventional motors with the same electrical input and size.

Build the proof of concept, you will see the phenomenon for yourself.

We will also be posting a set of plans for building a motor using this technology.

These are being posted by Michael Schuckel, an associate of Joseph Flynn, in the two weeks he has prior to possibly joining Joseph in working with Boeing on some proprietary applications of this technology.

• 1.) Reduce/remove oil dependance
• 2.) When Step 1 fails due to the control of the government by Lobbyists, extend the concept of Clean Elections to all governmental processes, both electoral and after they are in office, to legislate against corporate influence and return the government back to the control of the people.
• 3.) Try step 1 again, and offer government support to innovators. (possibly subsidy and X-Prize style?) Developing new technologies stimulates the economy via innovation, and subsidizing energy innovation is a more viable solution to fighting over a non-renewable natural resource controlled by (enter name here)
• 4.) PROFI- er, PROSPER! (We could even sell the renewable energy solutions back to the oil-controlling countries who aren't all that industrial, in an ironic twist...)

This sounds somewhat similar to the 1km high Solar Tower in Australia Both use convection to power turbines. This one though uses man-made vorteces while the Austrailian Solar Tower uses hot rising air.

Why did they 'disprove' 'Free Energy' by constructing a Bedini motor WITHOUT THE MAGNETS ON THE FLYWHEEL?

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Mythbusters _Dec.2004

While he might not have "mainstream" credentials comparable to what you might be used to seeing with mainstream science, you must admit that his credentials are impressive -- and brave. He is willing to go outside the box, but has a strong scientific background. Works in the patent office. Recently

http://peswiki.com/energy/Directory:Thomas_Valone

He recently won back his job as a US Patent Examiner, with back pay, after a long fight.
http://users.erols.com/iri/ValonePatentOfficeDecis ion.htm

The man is both smart and brave -- a combination rare in academia.

By the way, I have met Jackie, his wife, on a couple of occasions, and must say that she is one of the nicest, most genuine people I have ever met. She's in the top 1% of the bell curve when it comes to human decency. A tribute to Tom, that such a person would support him as a teammate.

-- Sterling

The 'Tornado in a can' is a funnel-shape device that takes rotating air at the top, and pulverizes whatever is put into it by the time it comes out the bottom.

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Tornado_in_ a_Can

Here's the catch, the amount of energy put in does not compute to the extent of pulverizing that takes place.

There is something about the vortex that present science does not comprehend.

Okay guys, let's not be so quick to slam this.

Just how smart are we anyway? Present scientific models do not fully comprehend vortex phenomena such as tornadoes and hurricanes -- or smaller-scale manifestations such as the "tornado in a can" pulverizer.

See index at: http://peswiki.com/energy/Directory:Vortex_Technol ogies

Don't throw out radically new idea too quickly. Our present models are not serving us in this area, so why not explore a new idea and see where it takes you?

Paul Noel (article author) is a genius, seldom appreciated by his peers -- true of most truly brilliant people (e.g. Tesla).

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Electrochar ger

Someone should really build a Klimator , a device designed by Viktor Schauberger.

Definately the best way to cool or heat a room, using implosion...
It might be a bit hard to find more info online though.

Avagdro's is 6x10^23 and it's 1.6x10^-19 J/eV.

6 x 10^23 * 6500 Ev * 1.6 x10^-19 J/eV = 624 MJ/mole

That translates into 173KW-hr per mole or 57.6KW-hr/g of decay.

Out of 1g half decays (28.8kWhr) over 12 years (105192 hours) =~ 0.27W sustained. An average laptop runs ~25W so you'd need 10g of tritium and a small battery to buffer the power (cursed unpredictable quantum events!)

That's at 100% efficiency. One source indicated current betavoltaics are at 25% efficiency so you'd need 40g of tritium. If this news p-n capture grid really is the shizzle, it might be closer to 50% efficiency, meaning 20g tritium.

The same source (http://peswiki.com/index.php/PowerPedia:Beta_volt aic) that quoted the 25% efficiency said total product power:weight ratio is 25W/kg. Dunno how much is, fuel, capture material, shielding, or power cleaning but being optimistic this new material might drop it to 50W/kg or roughly 22W/lb which is spot on for laptop usage.

in this article we've seen about solar cells using quantum dots. Quantum dots are tiny crystals smaller than an atom, and they can receive light.

So, if you think this artificial eye is cool, just wait till nanotech gets into the picture!

* Telescopic eyes! As seen on TV!
* Night vision
* Miniature laser rays coming out from the eye (remote control isn't that far fetched)
* Infrared / UV vision?

The sky's the limit!

There are numerous international studies which have seen various effects. This is unlike cold fusion, where the results couldn't be reproduced.

On the contrary, it is very similar. Some people claimed to reproduce the results, others could not. It is more accurate to say that they could not be reliably reproduced. Here is a recent DOE review

Note also that it is a lot easier to get positive results published than negative. So when I hear, "half the studies support it, and half don't," that tells me that it is very hard indeed to reproduce.

Furthermore, if you had read the article, you'll see that researchers are explicitly facing harassment by the industry. Many are being driven out because of this harassment.

By and large, industry has little power to drive anybody out of research. But to get continued grant funding for something as improbable as this, a researcher would have to show clear progress in elucidating the mechanism.

As for industry, I am sure that they are concerned about possible public relations or liability fallout from such research. But they probably also sincerely believe that is nonsense--because in terms of known mechanisms, it makes little sense.

Maybe, but since we're puuling the numbers to demonstrate that something is in fact the solution out of thin air, perhaps one of these is actually the solution: http://peswiki.com/index.php/Top10

We may already be successful. http://peswiki.com/index.php/Top10