Electrinium

[Koen1]

You don't have to tell me what Electrinium is supposed to be,
I had studied the "theory" extensively before anyone on the forum
ever mentioned it.
The basic idea is good, but unfortunately most of the PDF info is not.
Yes, obviously if we want to make a solid block that produces electicity
as in electrical current, we're looking at two elements namely electrical
charge and flow of electrical charge. Electrical charges flow along electrical
"field lines", so we'll want those field lines in the material. Ergo: electret
characteristics that result in a fixed arrangement of electric field lines.
But that's only going to get us a field, and a field is not current yet.
We can quite easily make electrets, and they will give us static charges,
but the internat structure of the material must also accomodate migration
of electrical charge carriers (not necessarily electrons) so that we can actually
have a flow of these charges through the material, along the
field lines we already built into the electret.
And with electrets, that is a problem, as the typical electret is a polarised
dielectric material, which means it is not conductive.
If we were to use a conductive material, say a compound of two or more
conductive elements, then we might be able to arrange the molecules
so that their dipole moment is aligned somewhat similarly to the polarisation
of the dielectric electret material, and we might be able to get some weak
field line structure. Because of the internal conductivity however, the electro-
static charge buildup will not be nearly as high as in the actual polarised
dielectric. Also, the field lines will then be arranged in opposition to the
relative "p"-"n" layering of the conductive compound's constituent atoms,
in other words, the layering of the conductive atoms would just about in
all cases be such that the diode-like "one-way-flow valve" effect is opposed
to the electric field lines, which obviously means that charges inside the
material "want to move" along the field lines while they are simultaneously
"blocked" from moving in that direction because of the materials own internal
structure (and obviously the related ionisation/emission potentials and work
functions of the specific elements involved).
And that's only on the theoretical level.
Practically there are other problems with the Electrinium concept.
Just imagine what would happen if you'd add a 50/50 compound of
iron and well let's take silver for the example here, and try to "seal"
it in a body of iron. How would we do that? Looks like the idea is to
somehow arrange all the silver-iron compound molecules so that they
all "face the same way", as to get the desired electret-like polarisation.
Ok, well, let's assume we have made a deal with a tribe of nanites and
they've arranged all these molecules for us.
Now we cast it in iron, right? So how would that work? We melt the iron,
then pour the molten iron over the so delicately arranged and obviously still
loose lying molecules, and we just hope and pray that our heavy liquid
metal goop will not disturb that arrangement in any way?
That's just a bit ubsurd, the molecules will obviously get washed along with
any liquid metal current, and the neat arrangement will be gone.
And that is assuming the molecules don't simply melt and become part
of a very nice iron-silver alloy block. Yes, that's another thing, metals when
contacted at melting points tend to form alloys, not nice compound molecules.
And alloy is one big block of crystalline structured solid metallic mixture.

It is very clear that mr. Summera who wrote the Electrinium PDF thought
that we must be able to replicate a similar arrangement of atoms as used in
semiconductor crystal diodes, but instead of using semiconductors he
thought we can use conductors and still get the semiconductive diode
"one-way valve" effect, but since conductors have a lot more "free" electrons
at room temperature than semiconductors do, the output would also be
a lot higher. It is also clear he had considered electret-like polarisation
of the material to attempt to produce field lines in this manner.
However, if one studies these fields, one will see that mr. Summera
appears to have only had a partial understanding of these fields, and
that it apparently never occurred to him that the field lines and
"n"-"p" effect seem to be oppositely oriented. He also seems to have
temporarily forgotten that molten metals tend to form alloys and not
neat bodies of molecules encased in one of the compounds constituent metals.
Also, and you may have noticed this, he seems to be confused as to
which implementation is best and easiest to produce as a prototype.
At first he starts explaining his "electrinium unit" using materials which
he swaps a page later for other materials, then he describes how the simplest
unit can be made using what, iron and silver? and then, when he finally
starts describing his step-by-step process for producing his hypothetical
unit, all of a sudden he uses completely different materials again, and all
of a sudden the process is a lot more complex than the entire easy and
simple iron-silve prototype he described the preceding pages. All of a sudden,
he is not using normal metals for the compound and body anymore, but now
he's using semiconductive crystal for the body, and he suggests a laughably
complicated alteration to a simple kiln, which if even affordable and achievable
for the home smelter, would certainly not be covered by any insurance company.
And the real clincher is of course the complete radio silence after his description
of this process. In the description he makes it sound like he has it all set up
and is ready to produce his prototype... But now, what, 20 years later, we still
do not know of any working Electrinium Units, and mr. Summera has also completely
disappeared from the radar screen, he's nowhere to be found.
Surely if mr. Summera had managed to produce a working Electrinium unit
according to the detailed description in his "theory" paper, he would have mentioned
this? If the style of his PDF is any measure, I would expect to see a last chapter
with a full and detailed, not to mention very enthousiastic, description of his prototype
and the output he measured.
Why would he not have done that? Because he either never even tried to build it,
or if we give him some credit and assume he did try to make it, it would seem
he did not manage to make a working version and instead of retracting his "theory"
he simply decided to keep quiet and focus on something else.
That's what is looks like.

Anyway, I do believe it is possible to produce a material that uses basically similar
concepts like the electret 'polarisation' and the "n"-"p" layering of compound materials
to produce output of a form that combines the electrostatic "electret" output and the
electrodynamic "diode"/"one-way-valve" principle, along with certain other aspects
(such as thermal conductivity relations, possible thermal/thermionic/background radiation
induced excitation, and possibly even anti-Stokes emission events).
I have been experimenting with various materials to this objective, and those interested
are welcome to check out the Crystal Cell thread to see some of that.
I don't think the Electrinium "theory" as described in the PDF is entirely correct nor
is the descriptions of the Electrinium units and their construction, but I do think
that mr Summera was starting to get close in his thinking. He just missed a few things.

[nievesoliveras]

@koen1

I do think that the pdf was altered by someone knowledgeable but with the intention of stopping the people to manufacture an "eternal" battery. It seems that he did it very swift, but reading it as you stated, the change on the way Summera is talking is noticed.

I do not abandon hope though.

Jesus

[resonanceman]

@koen1

I do think that the pdf was altered by someone knowledgeable but with the intention of stopping the people to manufacture an "eternal" battery. It seems that he did it very swift, but reading it as you stated, the change on the way Summera is talking is noticed.

I do not abandon hope though.

Jesus

couldn't  this be  similar to  electrinium?

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6230.0

gary

[nievesoliveras]

@resonanceman

I just dont know.
The arrangement is very expensive and it just gives .2 millivolts.

But it is a very interesting topic.

Jesus

[Koen1]

couldn't  this be  similar to  electrinium?

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6230.0

gary

Well yes and no. It is more similar to the Crystal Cells.

On a certain level the diode-like arrangement is similar,
but it does not accord with most of what is described in
the Electrinium paper at all.
It is in much better accordance with normal diode theory.
It is in fact exactly what is described on the site: an array
of a huge number of small diodes, which sort of rectify the
minute ambient oscillations.