Overunity.com Archives

After two years of research, both experimentally and mathematically, IMO it's now safe to say that I have a "Free Energy" machine.

Ok, ok, it's not powering anything useful, yet, but the first step was accomplished, which was proving that it would work. I am now confident that this technology could produce over 18000 watts per square meter.

The great thing about this technology is that it requires no batteries, no source of power. It's 100% passive. It's not difficult or expensive to replicate this using macro size diodes. My small diode array, 156 in-series SMS7630 diodes can produce over 0.2mV DC with 850Kohms impedance. Like I said, not much power, but it provides proof.

People have no idea of the precautions I've taken. One of many examples is placing the small diode array inside three layers of metal shielding, taking the diode array to various *rural* locations. Yes, the diode array continued to produce a DC voltage.

My next step is to make an inexpensive diode chip that produces usable amounts of power.

A new forum was just created. Please feel free to create or reserve your user name and post -->

http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/forum/

Regards,
Paul

Also the website -->

http://greenselfreliantenergy.com

PL

What is the Amp/Watt of the 156 mini array?

0.2mV is 0.0002 V?

18000 watts for a meters square is around 1300 x 156 diodes array, 18k / 1300 = 13.8 Watts. I dont think your small array produce 14 watts?

Anyway nice experiment, I just want to learn more about it.

Thanks.

Diode array #1:
The 18000 watts/m^2 is the calculated power density for n-InSb 30nm diodes on a wafer. The power density was calculated with Diode NATE v0.3 using the best conventional small signal semiconductor mathematics, which is based on quantum physics. Diode array #1 has not been made yet.

Diode array #2:
The 156 diode array is an entirely different diode array. It's the first real working diode array made from individual dual macro size diodes purchased from Skyworks Inc. that were hand soldered.


Diode array #2 was inexpensive and easy to make. It's entire purpose was to just prove that it works, that the mathematics is correct. It was the only option for me given my financial situation.

The next step is to produce a diode array chip made of microscopic diodes.

Regards,
Paul

So you'll need billions of diodes to achieve 18K Watt?

Billions and billions and billions, as Carl Sagan was famous for saying.  :)

But in terms of modern semiconductor fabrication, that doesn't mean anything because each layer of material is deposited all at once. IOW, they do not make each diode at a time. Rather, it would require anywhere from 1/2 to 1 dozen layers to make the entire diode chip. So it doesn't matter if there's just one diode or 100 trillion diodes on the entire chip. You could think of it as developing a photo.

PL

Hi,
I foud this very interesting.
Electrons thermally vibrate.In a conductor a net voltage result is zero,sice process is chaotic.
But,if we find a way to implement to this chaotic movement something that will give a gradient-  a net preffered direction..... :)
Plus a gate.
I was thinking about this from some time already.I must find a solution.
Regards,
pix

You can find those *natural* temperature gradients in all mater, all the time, even at a macro scale. Johnson noise is caused by natural microscopic temperature gradients.

There are all types of different noise. The main cause of flicker noise is trapped charges.

BTW, you can find a solution on my website (not the forum) in the replication page. I'm estimating that for about $50 you can replicate my diode array. I'm not selling anything, but you can freely find all of the part numbers there.

PL

Btw if you're going for nanoscale with that much power. Won't the chip melt? And what's the plan on actually buying/making these chips?

It would be a dream to reach that point. 18K watts is equal to 24 horse power, so it's not that much in terms of a car. Until 1998 the Porsche 911 3.6 liter engine was air cooled. So it's all about thermal conductivity. IMO 18K watts is easy to maintain with simple air cooled. Liquid cooled would offer better thermal conductivity. Also,  the diode array would have the opposite problem, as it would want to cool down, not heat up. So at least we don't have to worry about the chip burning up.

PL

Quote from: broli on December 03, 2008, 06:52:27 PM
Btw if you're going for nanoscale with that much power. Won't the chip melt? And what's the plan on actually buying/making these chips?

No.. CPUs run at around 90 watts.

Jason

put it up bro  8)

ill build it  ;D

i have bout 10 000 diodes lol   

perhaps they are the wrong kind :(

hey if they are ...  ill just go get the right ones ...

so if you get free output well  why not add to it  ;)  such as amp it ... ;)

ist!

As far as inexpensive high performance off the shelf diodes I would highly recommend the SMS7630.
http://www.cdistore.com/skyworks/schottky_diode.aspx?pid=227

And the replication page,
http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/experiments/replication/

Let me know if you're interested and I could find the exact SMS7630 part number.

PL

QuoteYou can find those *natural* temperature gradients in all mater, all the time, even at a macro scale. Johnson noise is caused by natural microscopic temperature gradients.

There are all types of different noise. The main cause of flicker noise is trapped charges.

BTW, you can find a solution on my website (not the forum) in the replication page. I'm estimating that for about $50 you can replicate my diode array. I'm not selling anything, but you can freely find all of the part numbers there.

PL

Yes,
But the trick is to implement such net tendency in some larger scale,to get higher levels of energy. If I remember Dr.Harold Aspden was quite busy in this kind of research.There s also company who developed a power chip-kind of diode effectively turning heat gradient into electricity.This is called Thermionics.
http://www.powerchips.gi/
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Eneco_power_chip
http://www.avtometals.gi/
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/5065085.pdf
Regards,
pix

I wander if all those outdated IC chips going to landfill sites could be utilized for something like this.
Anyone tried measuring various leads on various IC chips to see if there is any voltage output from them?

Quote from: AbbaRue on December 04, 2008, 03:13:17 AM
I wander if all those outdated IC chips going to landfill sites could be utilized for something like this.
Anyone tried measuring various leads on various IC chips to see if there is any voltage output from them?

Paul's system is based on diodes connected in series. I can't imagine why chip makers
would design such.
Paul-R

The SMS7630 diode has 0.14pF Cjo.  So it's a microwave diode. Most diodes have at least 20 times more capacitance, and typically over a hundred times. According to the mathematics, the DC voltage increases with a decrease in capacitance in a linear fashion. So you want diodes with low capacitance.

Next, you want a diode with low Ro (zero bias resistance) since you want to place a lot of diodes in-series to bring up the voltage so you measure it. If Ro is 20Mohms, then that's 20Gohms with 1000 diodes in-series. The great thing about the SMS7630 is that it's referred to as a ZBD (zero bias Diode), with 5400 ohms. So if the electrometer is 100Mohms impedance then it's no problem for the diode array to be 54Mohms, which comes to 54M / 5400 = 10000 diodes in-series. I believe such a diode array could produce over 20mV DC.

On the other hand, if you don't have a good electrometer, which would cost you about $20 in parts to buy and make yourself, then you could use some high capacitance Mylar capacitors. Lets say the Mylar cap has 5Gohms parallel resistance. That's close to 1 million diodes in-series, which is expected to produce at least 2 volts DC. What you would do is leave the Mylar capacitor across the diode array inside the shields for a while, nothing else. The diode array will charge the capacitors. Then remove the shield lids and place your ordinary voltage meter across the capacitors and measure the DC voltage.

As far as other diodes, I've never tested them, but according to the mathematics a 1N914 with 4pF of capacitance would produce about 28 times less DC voltage as the SMS7630. So it's best to use low capacitance and low resistance diodes.

PL

Mitch made a good post at -->

http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/forum/index.php?topic=17.0

Any replies  ;)  ;)

PL

Quote from: TheOne on December 03, 2008, 05:16:05 PM
What is the Amp/Watt of the 156 mini array?

0.2mV is 0.0002 V?

18000 watts for a meters square is around 1300 x 156 diodes array, 18k / 1300 = 13.8 Watts. I dont think your small array produce 14 watts?

Anyway nice experiment, I just want to learn more about it.

0.0002V / 850,000 OHMs = 2.35 x10 ^-10 Amps. (.000000000235A = 235 nanoamps)
give or take

I think making chip sized arrays is something that won't happen very soon. When this happens it means a great shift in mentality has taken place for a chip factory to start working on so called free energy devices. The best thing we can do now is try and build as big arrays as possible. This can be done true patience and through collaborative work by sending arrays to each other to get  bigger result.

I think you're right about companies making diode arrays. I put in a request to have a very simple diode array built by mosis.com.  I waited two weeks without any reply, and finally contacted them. They didn't want to do it, and gave no reason, but he was kind enough to give me a phone number to call him.

IMO companies are a bit uneasy about building something that appears very odd. I don't know how so many companies know about diode arrays, but I sent Virginia Diodes Inc. an email while mentioning Charles M Brown's name. He replied back saying he'll have nothing to do with it! Apparently I'm now on their email band list.  :(

PL

Hello pix,

QuoteElectrons thermally vibrate.In a conductor a net voltage result is zero,sice process is chaotic.
But,if we find a way to implement to this chaotic movement something that will give a gradient-  a net preffered direction..... Smiley
Plus a gate.
I was thinking about this from some time already.I must find a solution.

you should read the following Aspden-Paper on the Nerst-Effect :

http://www.aspden.org/reports/Es3/ (http://www.aspden.org/reports/Es3/)

Best Regrards

Kator01

Hi Paul,
good to see, that you have nailed it down now with these
diodes types and you measurements.

But for practical applications to at least light up a white LED
it would be needed really an IC chip.

So anybody got any contacts in the IC industry so a real
chip can be made to try this out ?

We really need trilions of diodes in series to get a real useful
output voltage...

Regards, Stefan.

For some time I've been working on a process to build my own diode array chips that would produce usable amounts of power. It's not a quick project. May take a year or two to fine tune. Please let me know what you think -->

http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/forum/index.php?topic=18.0

Paul

Hi Stefan,

I agree, totally! The good news is, as I've recently learned, the modern chip fabrication deposits the *entire* elements (e.g., Silicon) all at once. So if we use 30nm technology with a total spacing of 60nm and the wafer is 10cm x 10cm then there's 2.8 trillion diodes!  That's far more than enough diodes.

See my previous post for a real proposed *home project* that could fabricate diode array chips. We can't achieve 30nm diodes, but IMO 200nm is possible with a lot of fine tuning and learning. Although initially even 1um diode technology (old technology) would provide enough to power a house. A home project could easily achieve 1um diodes.

If people interested in this could help out with advice for improving the above proposed home project then perhaps we could get the project procedure down.

For me, nothing sounds better than allowing people to make their own "free energy" machine, especially a machine that could make one entire chip per day.  :)

PL

Quote from: Kator01 on December 04, 2008, 11:47:26 AM
Hello pix,


you should read the following Aspden-Paper on the Nerst-Effect :

http://www.aspden.org/reports/Es3/ (http://www.aspden.org/reports/Es3/)

Best Regrards

Kator01

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nernst_effect
"Semiconductors exhibit the Nernst effect. This has been studied in the 1950s by Krylova, Mochan and many others. In metals however, it is almost non-existent. "

Aspden: "... in steel as much as 16.6 volts could be set up by a temperature gradient of one degree C per cm if the magnetic field strength was 10,000 gauss."

One of the two above does not hold water.
Place your bets, pls.  ;)

Cheers,
Tinu

Quote from: PaulLowrance on December 04, 2008, 11:01:42 AMThey didn't want to do it, and gave no reason,

Maybe they are concerned about the yield. For example, in a PowerMOSFET, you have everything in parallel and a few broken ones don't matter that much (this can be a trap if many FETs are broken and it appears to be OK if tested without full load). Since everything is in series, there must be an efficient way to test and short out broken diodes.

I don't know. They wouldn't tell me via email.

In-parallel has an equal problem of short. If one of the diodes in-parallel is shorted then the whole thing is useless. If one is shorted in-series then it's no big deal.

I would like a few hundred first in-series, and then place groups of those in parallel.

PL

I think this is a great idea. One difficulty that normal semiconductor guys will have with it
is that one is going to have to optimize the semiconductor structure in a way *opposite* for
normal semiconductor process. There may be fears of setting up a conflict of knowledge.

The other thing I think, one should do is build in energy self limiting circuit structures inside, to prevent
things from burning up when accidental exposed to large amount of power in a beam. Like X-ray or
Cell-phones. Possibly by having an external energy dump resistor. That way one would not
have to build a physical isolation chamber to keep the device within spec in event of
an accidental exposure. Those power specs are everything that is important...it is not
absolute device power that is important to making the device a commercial success.

:S:MarkSCoffman

You should definitely invite Z-monkey in here as he has a lot of work experience in semi conductors and might have some useful connections.

Hi Paul,

There was a thread here in 2005 active for 2-3 months dealing with trying to utilize the Johnson noise in diodes and among the contributors to that thread there were some members with diode manufacturing backgrounds so it would seem worthwhile to look for them.

The title of the thread is Diode Array, many small parallel diodes to aggregate rectified Johnson Noise   and here is the link: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=26.0

The topic is two pages long only and has not received any contribution since 2005, wonder what happened to Charles Brown's idea since then.

rgds,  Gyula

If you like diode use 100 led in series use the clear casing one red light work good , white light don't know.you will have 120 volt if you put it in the sun light.A single of those gives 1.2 to 1.5 volts,this is good but 6 micro volts is still not much.Cheap solar cell but difficult making sure getting the most light in but maybe using flat ones and glue to mirror . There are uv led and also infrared so test could be made for different light spectrum .If i put my led in series it raises the amps but getting decent current will make it much more costly and regular solar panel cheaper.

I occasionally talk to Charles. He's more of a thinker. Thinking is fun, but in the end someone has to do something.  8)

PL

Hi All

Thanks for opening the thread PaulLowrance interesting subject.

I've been following this thread and noticed that Tom Schum did some work on the Jhonson noise effect while surfing the web, seeing he hadn't been mentioned I thought maybe some people would like to see his work and results from last year.

Array: http://mysite.verizon.net/vzesfls5/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/array_mounted_e.jpg
Schematics:  http://mysite.verizon.net/vzesfls5/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/sms7621_array_sch.pdf
Test results: http://mysite.verizon.net/vzesfls5/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/7630_data.pdf

Regards,
Paul

Hi,

I have Tom Schum's diode array in my lab. I still have not tested it, yet. One thing I don't like about his diode array is that it's not 100% in-series. As far as my understanding of the semiconductor mathematics, paralleling diodes increases the junction capacitance. So in Tom's case, he has 32 diodes per row in-parallel, which equals 0.5pF * 32 = 16pF. The total Johnson noise is equal to the kTC noise, which equals sqrt(k*T/C). So the kTC noise is sqrt(16) = 4 times less than a single 1N34A diode, which means the DC voltage (due to rectification) is 4^2 = 16 times less-- diode square law.

My recommendations are -->

* If one is going to test for voltage, then place all of the diodes in-series.

* If one is going to test for current, then place *groups* in-parallel. Each group should consist of at least 5 diodes in-series. The reason for not placing diodes in direct parallel connection is because it increases the junction capacitance.


If anyone's interested in the mathematics, you can find it at my website -->

http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/physics/dirtydetails/

PL

"Smoking Gun - finally!"

Hmm, 0,2mV / 850kOhm?  ???

I suggest you change your thread title..
Sorry.

What's everyone's definition of "smoking gun."

PL

For me the "smoking gun" is what proves the concept. The first air plane, made by the Wright Brothers, had a top speed of 30 mph. It's unknown how far it would even fly, probably not very far at all.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wright_Flyer

The first patented gas powered car produced 0.7HP. The first gas powered motor probably produced hardly no power and was lucky to even run.

The first electrically telegraphed message produced practically no power to speak of. Now we have megawatt stations, and even satellites.

I think there's a first for everything. The first air plane does not compare to a Jet or Airliner. The first car does not compare to a modern car. The first telegraphed message does not compare to a megawatt station.

One would think that people would be excited of t he first *proven* "free energy' machine, which is exactly what this is. According to the mathematics, it's possible to make diode array chips that produce Kilowatts.

PL

the "smoking gun" is when you can have a diode-array power a small motor continuously.

what would it take? a shoebox full of diodes?
perhaps a coleman cooler?

an entire Garage???

3-4 million diodes might get you above the cut-off voltage of most LEDS,  but it could take a trillion more to achieve enough current to produce light.

suppose we were to start producing diodes on rolls of silicone foil,  trillions of tiny diodes per cm^3
what then? something the size of a volvo might power a computer?
and thats assuming that the EMF created by such a large array doesnt cancel out the effect.

Can you show where I can find that definition? I don't share your definition.

As far as trillions of diodes, like I said, modern semiconductor chip fabrication process deposits *all* of the material per layer at once. There's about 4 layers to make a simple diode. So the machines don't create each diode at a time. As far as the fabrication is concerned, it doesn't matter if there's a 1 diode on the chip or 10 trillion. All of the diodes would be made simultaneously.

PL

The definition of "Smoking Gun" -->

Wikipedia
+++++++
"The term "smoking gun" was originally, and is still primarily, a reference to an object or fact that serves as conclusive evidence of a crime or similar act. In addition to this, its meaning has evolved to uses completely unrelated criminal activity: for example, scientific evidence that is highly suggestive in favour of a particular *hypothesis* is sometimes called smoking gun evidence."
+++++++
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoking_gun

PL

Edit: added -->
So I think the first proven air plane was the smoking gun. The first proven gas motor was the smoking gun. The first proven electrically telegraphed message was the was the smoking gun. And I believe the diode array would qualify as the smoking gun.

Hi PaulLowrance,

I have been thinking about what you are talking about since you first posted about it and I know have a couple of questions that I would like to ask you.

Does anyone make micro diodes as small as what would be needed?

If so, how much would a trillion of them cost?

If no one makes them, how much would it cost to make?

The other thing that concerns me is the power you are getting as to where it is actually from. The small levels you have recorded are far less then the energy your own body is amitting. So who is to say that you are actually creating a new energy source?

Don't think I am trying to be a smart ass, I am seriously concerned about those questions.

There are two types of diode arrays -->

A. Made with large diodes that you solder. The *only* purpose of this diode array is to prove that passive diodes produce a DC power that can be aggregated.

B. A diode array *chip.*  This is not made with individual diodes. Again, the entire chip is made all at once!  People need to get this idea out of their head that each diode is purchased and made a once. The entire chip is made *simultaneously.*

I already built diode type A. To produce usable amounts of power someone needs to build diode type B. So again, it does not matter if there's one diode or 10 trillion diodes on the entire chip because all of the diodes are made simultaneously. You could think of like developing a photo. It doesn't make sense to say, "There are too many dots in the photo, so it's going to be too expensive."


Your other concerns have been addressed for nearly a year. I am 100% certain the energy is not coming from *any* external source. I used two layers of metal shielding and up to three layers. The old diode arrays were large, so they picked up external RF signals in the city. So I took my second diode array out to a lot of different locations far out in rural areas with *three* layers of metal shielding. My last two diode arrays are compact arrays. They are so small that while in the city of Los Angeles I can remove the lids of both metal shields and there's no change in DC voltage. I can place my hand right next to the diode array with no change in DC voltage.

BTW, the last two diode arrays are placed in a common oil bath to eliminate any measurable thermoelectric effects.

PL

A lot of questions are answered at -->

http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/forum/index.php?board=9.0

I just created two threads on how to replicate my diode array -->

http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/forum/index.php?board=15.0

Quote from: nightlife on December 06, 2008, 11:57:50 AMDon't think I am trying to be a smart ass, I am seriously concerned about those questions.

You're fine! Given a few posts, it's easy to tell a legitimately interested person and a debunker.



PL

Just to give an idea how large the energies I am working with compared to other areas of physics -->

Photon counters count individual photons. A red 750nm photon has 3e-19 joules of energy.

I am working with a 4.7uF Mylar charging capacitor. The 156 in-series SMS7630 diode array has produced 204uV DC, which comes to 1e-13 joules.


As far as power, the Keithley 6517B electrometer can handle loads has high has 100T, and can measure down to 10uV, which comes to  10e-6^2/100e+12 = 1e-24 watts.

My diode array comes to 204e-6^2/850e+3 = 5e-14 watts.


PL

This is really heart crushing you know. A chip company can put these out in a matter of weeks considering their simplicity. Intel et al can already put billions of transistors on a few cm^2. Let alone diodes that are simpler and in this case pretty much straightforward. A CPU or GPU is a complete package to run a PC but this is just putting diode after diode which requires no brain work so to speak.

Instead we have to resort to making our own chip foundry at home because they are too stubborn to handle the request.

I agree!  It would just be nice to at least see a quote, I mean, even if the quote is highly inflated just to get rid of me, lol.  They could at least say, "Oh, it would cost you 2 million dollars to make that chip."

The good news is that a home brew garage project semiconductor fabrication setup is not too difficult or expensive. I was talking to a guy who made diodes and LED's while in college with home brew equipment his professor made. They used 1e-4 torr vacuum, which is very easy and inexpensive to achieve. To make a chip that could power a small light doesn't need to be 30nm technology. Even 10um ancient technology could achieve that much power.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to suggest that if we slap together a diode array chip that it's going to produce usable amounts of power. This is uncharted territory. I can only offer the conventional semiconductor mathematics, in addition to my present diode arrays that use over the counter diodes.

What's nice about making our own equipment to make diode array chips is that we can make a *small* chip, test it, make another small chip with a slight adjustment, test, and compare. We could learn what diode parameters work best before making a large chip.

Also, it would be great to be able to make your own chips, any kind of chip. To say the least, you could easily make your own solar cells, which would be easier to make than a single small diode.  :)


PL

just looked on Ebay, you can get 700   1N4007 diodes for $15

that comes to about 2 cents each.   im sure there are other places to get them in bulk.
cut the legs short and solder them into rods of 20-30 diodes.
then connect them all in series to get the voltage you desire.
then duplicate the modules and connect them in parallel to attempt to draw usable power.

700-1k  shouldn't be much bigger than a large textbook,     and if you could even get it to light a tiny LED that would be enough to draw interest in the chip making industry

Thanks for info. Here's the mathematical evaluation:

There are only a few over the counter diodes that I could recommend because most diodes have too much capacitance and to high resistance. The 1N4007 has over 60 times more total capacitance than the SMS7630, and 2000 times more low signal resistance. We want diodes with the lowest capacitance and resistance. Also the 1N4007 has extremely high ideality coefficient, which is not good.

In short, this means each 1N4007 diode would produce 21 million times less DC power than the SMS7630. Each SMS7630 diode is 0.47/2 = 23.5 cents each.

I used the 1N4007 model from:
http://www.electronicspoint.com/ibis-models-wanted-1n4007-and-icm7556-t24976.html

As far as I'm aware, the SMS7630 is the most cost effective over the counter diode for this.


A few things I could promise with nearly 100% guarantee. A diode array built with 1N4007 is guaranteed to fail. It would require far too many diodes to produce sufficient DC voltage, *but* a 1N4007 diode array total resistance would be too high for the voltage meter.


PL

I have been told that the Japanese did some work like this about ten years ago using cable wire. I am waiting for more information on that and I will post it as soon as I get it.

I am also wondering what the outcome would be if triodes were used in the place of diodes. Any thoughts on this?

Paul,

About 24 years ago I took a tour of Purdue University's EE department as a potential student.  There we were shown multicolor plots of CAD drawings that were used to make the masks for custom semiconductors.  It was explained that seniors in EE were able to design their own chip and then have three wafers produced for test and evaluation as part of their senior design project.  I'm not sure where they were made or if such programs still exist.  I remember they said the wafers were not fab-ed at the University.  Thought you might try contacting a University EE department or similar institution to see if and how they get short runs of semi conductors.

Maybe you will need to find a way to produce the drawings for the masks first?

I'll ask some salesmen from my company who cover the West Coast if they have ever run across companies or contacts who do anything like this.  Unfortunately our products don't usually end up in the semiconductor industry anymore, but when they did I noticed those people all knew each other and changed employers quite often.  Worth a shot.

Good luck.

M.

Are you referring to vacuum tube triodes?  It's possible, but one problem with vacuum is the high workfunction. You would need a material with a workfunction (in vacuum) of about 0.1eV to 0.2eV. The workfunction of most elements is around 3 to 5 eV. Making triodes shouldn't be too difficult. You just need a vacuum (rotary vane and a diffusion pump), glass tube, metal plates and wires. Although I don't know how I would seal the glass tube. Perhaps a heated tungsten wire to melt the glass?

Mondrasek, you gave me a good idea. If I demonstrated my diode array to a University professor to prove it's legit, perhaps he could help me design and build a diode array chip using the University equipment.  I don't think all Universities have semiconductor fabrication equipment. Some build their own home brew equipment that's capable of making low quantity components. A few of big Universities probably have the expensive stuff, costing hundreds of thousands of dollars, that can quickly & easily make chips. I'm in the middle of performing a long term diode array experiment, which could take another month to complet.  After that I would like to make a data logger and log the diode array output for another month or two.

PL

OK....OK... after lots of reading i will have to say i am hooked..LOL You have peaked my interest.

So, i was looking for some diodes for other experiments i have done in the past with plasma sparks and i came across a Ebayer that is in China selling diodes... the quote in the bottom of his auction reads...

"WE OFFER CUSTOM-MADE PRODUCTION OF DIODES ACCORDING TO THE SPECIFICATION YOU SUPPLY." ;D
here is a link to his store:
http://stores.ebay.com/OT-Electronics

Also i had at one time owned my own SMD PCB machines, for stuffing boards. You had mentioned a need for a for a mask. And i thought you might be able to have a mask made for you. Using a SMD solder stencil. Its lazer cut thin SS....you probably cant get your optimal size you want, but it might be a good choice for the home shop...just a thought...

DAMIT..i wish i still have those machines...  :-\

What is the largest array anyone has made so far? and what were the results??

QuoteOK....OK... after lots of reading i will have to say i am hooked..LOL You have peaked my interest.

Thanks! In trying to be honest and unbiased here, the diode array is the only device I'm aware of, so far, that anyone can replicate *right now* with all of the necessary details that will produce energy without any batteries. Okay, I admit, I've been measuring the DC voltages for 12 months now, so I cannot expect other people to feel as confident as I am. From a conventional physics mathematical perspective and experimental perspective it's looking like a thumbs up!

Quote"WE OFFER CUSTOM-MADE PRODUCTION OF DIODES ACCORDING TO THE SPECIFICATION YOU SUPPLY." ;D

I'll try to contact him. Hopefully he can fabricate chips as well.

QuoteWhat is the largest array anyone has made so far? and what were the results??

I would only consider the diodes "that count."  IOW, if the person is trying to measure for voltage, then it's meaningless to place diodes in-paralle. So then I would say my 156 in-series diode array is the largest so far.


PL

Hi Paul,

I remember reading about your work when you were writing with Charlie a while back on the Steorn forum. I agree with you this is a smoking gun (albeit a tiny gun), it proves that a Maxwells Demon like device is possible and it is obviously scaleable.

Just a thought, you may get better luck with chip fab if you tell them that you are building some novel 2D detector array or something like that?

Also if you could produce the VLSI CAD file yourself then the fabs might take you more seriously. I know one gentleman (he was my tutor) who was the lead programmer of a unix based VLSI design tool called chipwise, you can download it here for free:

http://www.ee.kent.ac.uk/chipwise/uksupport/uksupport.html

One question for you, could you give me any pointers on making a very sensitive and stable voltmeter fairly cheaply, would opamps be useful?

All the best, Yucca.

@xbox hacker

Thanks for the tip, cool ebay store, have added to my favourite sellers list!

http://stores.ebay.com/OT-Electronics

I´m going to get some very low ESR high voltage caps from them. :)

Yucca.

QuoteOne question for you, could you give me any pointers on making a very sensitive and stable voltmeter fairly cheaply, would opamps be useful?

You can find op-amps that handle just about anything. Most are under $10. Although it depends what you're willing to give up, and what you mean by "stable."  If you want low temp drift, then chopper (zero drift) op-amps are good, but they're very noise. Linear Tech is a good choice.

Linear tech also has some ultra low noise op-amps.

I'm using the INA116P for it's ultra low bias current, typical is 3fA. Since I'm dealing with DC, the output noise isn't a problem. Also the input noise is not a problem because I can place as much capacitance as I necessary to short out the op-amps noise across the input pins. Also, temperature drift is not a problem because I'm using a mechanical toggle switch to reverse to input voltage. In a matter of minutes I can take three measurements, get the two diffs, and take the average of the two diffs. No op-amp temp drift is so bad that it will drift in a matter of minutes.

PL

@Paul,

Thanks for the info.

I was wrong the VLSI design software i mentioned above is not free to everyone only to students :(

edit:
I thought this might interest you:
http://nanotechweb.org/cws/article/tech/22916

Yucca.

One question ...

Heat will be a problem the more energy produced will it not?

Diodes while very rugged are prone to heat issues...

While that might be solved in science already the cost issues of fabrication to eliminate the heat issue has not been solved...

If one diode fails will not the whole array not work leaving us with a set of old school xmas lights that don't work cause there is one bad apple.

We got to think of these things even in beta stages.

-infringer-

Infringer,

The diode array would get cold, not hot, as it would merely move existing thermal energy to the output source/appliance. Fortunately, we don't have to worry about the diode array heating up.  :)

As far as a diode breaking the entire diode array, that would not be a problem. The best diode array would be one that is first in-series, and next in-parallel. See the attached image for an example. If one of the diodes breaks, then just one line breaks, not the entire diode array chip. The only way to break the entire diode array is if an entire line of diodes shorts, but the chance of that happening is almost zero since a diode array will most likely have 100 or more diodes per line.

PL

Also, we're talking about a diode array chip that would be made of trillions of diodes. So the amount of current flowing through each diode is irrelevant. Current will not destroy the diodes. Each diode would last as long as an unused diode, which is essentially forever.

That brings up the other topic. People see that number, "trillion," and freak out. Chip fabrication makes the entire chip at once. So each diode is *not* made at a time. We should think of each diode on a chip as a dot on a photo. Each dot is not made at a time when developed a Kodak photo. So a trillion simple diodes in-series and in-parallel is no big deal when mass produced.

PL

So, what would the cost of 2 million of the diodes as opposed to a chip of 2 million diodes?  Would it be possible to have a chip manufacturer custom make a chip for you?  More importantly, will the technology scale up?  I would hate it if it was limited by a certain voltage, I guess it's my way of thinking.  I can't see this thing producing 100 volts.

@Paul

Just one question... one the array attached to the Mylar cap you obviously dont have any extra caps or resistors. But on the board version you have SMD resistors and caps.....are those needed?

Is their any critical spacing requirement if one was to place the diodes on a PCB? How close can you place them?

@Yucca:

No problem!  ;)


@Super God

the SMS7630  diodes are about $.33 ea....but you get 2 in one package. I can only assume if you buy it by the reel, the price would be much less.

QuoteSo, what would the cost of 2 million of the diodes as opposed to a chip of 2 million diodes?

Yikes, I wouldn't want to think how much a diode array consisting of 2 million *individual* diodes would cost. As far as a diode array chip consisting of one trillion microscopic diodes (10cm x 10cm chip with 100nm diode spacing) on a 10cm x 10cm would cost less than a 10cm x 10cm solar panel when mass produced. IOW, it will be dirt cheap!

Don't get me wrong. Although I'm confident it will work, I don't want to say with 100% certainty that a diode chip made of microscopic diodes will produce usable amounts of energy anytime soon. It's possible the first diode chip will produce usable energy, or it's possible it might require a lot of trial and error. I'm just basing this on my present diode array made with SMS7630 diodes and the mathematics of conventional physics.

QuoteWould it be possible to have a chip manufacturer custom make a chip for you?

Yes. That's very easy for modern technology.

QuoteMore importantly, will the technology scale up?I would hate it if it was limited by a certain voltage, I guess it's my way of thinking.

It appears to be scalable. I've built two compact diode arrays, a 156 in-series and a 52 in-series. So far it appears to be scalable.

QuoteI can't see this thing producing 100 volts.

I have to pinch myself everyday in disbelief that I now have real legitimate "free energy" devices in the lab that have produced a DC voltage for 12 months now. It's a dream come true. Perhaps scientists said the same thing about solar cells. What an exciting moment it must have been to see the first solar cell produce over one volt DC. The day will come, soon, when the first diode array *will* produce over one volt DC.  ;D


PL

Quote@Paul

Just one question... one the array attached to the Mylar cap you obviously dont have any extra caps or resistors. But on the board version you have SMD resistors and caps.....are those needed?

Is their any critical spacing requirement if one was to place the diodes on a PCB? How close can you place them?

In the first image in photo page -->
http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/experiments/photos/
you'll see three types of diode arrays. The large one, right side, is Tom Schum's. To left of Tom's, very top, is my first diode array. I made it while waiting for the PCB's to arrive. The solder traces were made with room temp liquid solder pen. The R's and C's were bought at a local store. This diode array forms what I call a JNR2d circuit. Don't use the JNR2d circuit!!!  It's unnecessary. The JNR2d circuit was designed because every Spice simulator *incorrectly* simulated diode noise. It turns out diodes actually produce Johnson noise equivalent to their dynamic resistance. I forward the proof of this to Mike, the creator of LTspice, he confirmed it, and LTspice now has the correct diode noise math equations. Although, back then we didn't know about this error in Spice, so we used an external resistor to produce the Johnson noise, and the caps were used to block the DC current.  All of those R's and C's are unnecessary. You only need diodes. In that same photo, left side, the middle diode array, is the same JNR2d circuits except it's on a PCB, and the R's and C's are small, 402 SMD.

In the same photo, left side, bottom diode array, you'll see a wall of diodes connected to a Mylar cap. That is the diode array people should make. The second photo shows a close up image of this diode array. It is wall of SMS7630 diodes, 156 of them in-series.

PL

I just created an animation of how the diode array chip would be fabricated in a vacuum and using deposition -->

http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/forum/index.php?topic=18.msg90#msg90

PL

Quote from: infringer on December 08, 2008, 10:21:28 PM
One question ...

If one diode fails will not the whole array not work leaving us with a set of old school xmas lights that don't work cause there is one bad apple.

We got to think of these things even in beta stages.

-infringer-

one solution to this problem will be a secondary parallel (resistive) connection on each module in the array
should 1 diode fail in any given module, it will take the parallel route through the resistor basically skip over the bad module,  you have a slight loss, but you wont lose the entire array.

important is to make sure the resistor value is GREATER than the total resistance of the module.
so the primary path will be through the series connection.

A parallel array by itself does not solve the problem. Paralleling has big problems with shorts. A single short would render a parallel diode array useless.

The solution would be a combo of series and parallel. Although for the moment I cannot recommend placing diodes in *direct* parallel to each other because it decreases the kTC noise. Therefore, there's no reason why not to place at least a dozen diodes in-series first, and then in parallel. That way, no two diodes are directly connected in parallel.

PL

Quote from: PaulLowrance on December 09, 2008, 03:13:10 PM
A parallel array by itself does not solve the problem. Paralleling has big problems with shorts. A single short would render a parallel diode array useless.

The solution would be a combo of series and parallel. Although for the moment I cannot recommend placing diodes in *direct* parallel to each other because it decreases the kTC noise. Therefore, there's no reason why not to place at least a dozen diodes in-series first, and then in parallel. That way, no two diodes are directly connected in parallel.

PL

maybe i didnt describe what i was talking about well enough.

what im saying is to add a parallel "shortcut" around EACH module in the array (or group of series connected diodes) so if 1 diode becomes "open" somehow or fails to conduct electricity (wasn't layered perfectly inside the chip, whatever other failure we cant think of)
the flow of current will not be disrupted, it will simply flow through the resistive circuit to the next module or group of diodes.
and the entire array wll continue to function as normal (minus the failed group/module).
the resistor in the shortcut path should be slightly higher han the resistance of the combined diodes it is going around, so it will not affect the functionality of the device except for the loss of the failed module.

The following post shows a circuit of what I had in mind -->
http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/forum/index.php?topic=19.msg53#msg53
The above circuit would not require a resistor. So if a diode is an open-circuit, then it only affects that individual line of diodes.  If a diode shorts, then it's no bid deal, just a loss of one single diode.

Of course, adding a resistor across each diode would help if a diode becomes an open-circuit, but IMO that's a bit much. If by chance a diode is open, then it's just one line out of 10 billion lines. So 1 / 10 billionth is not going to be noticeable. A 10cm x 10cm diode array chip consisting of 1 trillion diodes would have about 5 to 10 billion diode *lines*, where each line consist of 100 to 200 diodes in-series.

PL

Quote from: PaulLowrance on December 09, 2008, 10:53:41 AM
...
That brings up the other topic. People see that number, "trillion," and freak out.
...
PL

Hi PL,

I’m not sure this is the case. At least not for the people that really matter for business.
I suppose they freak out for another reason(s):

There are good studies available that show, as predictable, that any noise theory (1/f  included) that does not obey thermodynamics will fail. I regret for not being able to nominate at least one such study but I remember learning about them some time ago and I recall they are freely available on the internet.
Simply put:
1. one can not extract energy from an isothermal reservoir alone. Noise-extraction method (as any other conceivable attempt) is included. I have little doubts that there is room for debates here but I’m nonetheless open to discuss the subject.
2. If we speak about a temperature gradient across a junction, then it is indeed theoretically possible to extract useful work, but:
a) Carnot is the king anyway and for infinitesimal thermal variations (as for a diode resting in environment) the maximum attainable efficiency is that given by the known formula and consequently the extracted work is minuscule. Is it worth trying?
b) if one is to create and mantain a significant thermal gradient across the junction(s) to overcome 1) and 2a) above, the wafer is no longer of an appropriate design for that purpose and possibly the whole device shall move into carrier-diffusion area hence into thermo-electricity, which is already known technology.

Any thoughts about the above concerns?

Cheers,
Tinu

Quote from: tinu on December 09, 2008, 05:25:20 PM
There are good studies available that show, as predictable, that any noise theory (1/f  included) that does not obey thermodynamics will fail. I regret for not being able to nominate at least one such study but I remember learning about them some time ago and I recall they are freely available on the internet.
Simply put:
1. one can not extract energy from an isothermal reservoir alone. Noise-extraction method (as any other conceivable attempt) is included. I have little doubts that there is room for debates here but I’m nonetheless open to discuss the subject.
2. If we speak about a temperature gradient across a junction, then it is indeed theoretically possible to extract useful work, but:
a) Carnot is the king anyway and for infinitesimal thermal variations (as for a diode resting in environment) the maximum attainable efficiency is that given by the known formula and consequently the extracted work is minuscule. Is it worth trying?
b) if one is to create and mantain a significant thermal gradient across the junction(s) to overcome 1) and 2a) above, the wafer is no longer of an appropriate design for that purpose and possibly the whole device shall move into carrier-diffusion area hence into thermo-electricity, which is already known technology.

Any thoughts about the above concerns?

Cheers,
Tinu

Tinu,

1. Thermodynamics is a theory of macroscopic systems at equilibrium, and therefore the second law applies only to macroscopic systems with well-defined temperatures. On scales of a few atoms, the second law does not apply; for example, in a system of two molecules, it is possible for the slower-moving ("cold") molecule to transfer energy to the faster-moving ("hot") molecule. Such tiny systems are outside the domain of classical thermodynamics. For any isolated system with a mass of more than a few picograms, the second law is true to within a few parts in a million-- Reference: Landau, L.D.; Lifshitz, E.M. (1996). Statistical Physics Part 1. Butterworth Heinemann. ISBN 0-7506-3372-7.

2. The mathematical concept of equilibrium is an impossible state in real life; i.e., it would require infinite thermal insulation to achieve perfect equilibrium.

3. Standard Gaussian thermal noise equation used in modern nonlinear physics violates the laws of thermodynamics. Reference: Thermodynamically valid noise models for nonlinear devices. So either there's a problem with thermal noise with Gaussian distribution or it is possible to rectify thermal noise.

4. You do not use thermodynamics to solve diode modeling problems. To solve diode modeling problems you use diode modeling mathematics that is based on semiconductor physics, which is based on quantum physics. The most accurate small signal semiconductor mathematics *clearly* predicts that diodes *must* rectify natural ambient thermal energy.

5. I wrote a trapdoor software simulation program that clearly shows natural ambient thermal energy can be rectified. When time permits, I will release the source code, but IMO it won't matter because the evidence that my diode arrays are producing a DC voltage from natural ambient thermal energy is becoming overwhelming.

6. For 12 months now I have been measuring a DC voltage produce by a passive diode array contained in at least two layers of metal shielding, far in the various rural areas.


If you're interested in some mathematics them please help yourself -->

http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/physics/dirtydetails/

If you have any questions regarding the testing procedure, then you'll find a lot of the answers -->

http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/forum/index.php?board=9.0


I would be more than happy to have a scientific discuss about this topic, but it must be mathematically based. In terms of scientific discussions, I'm uninterested in claims and handwaving, no offense intended. Thermodynamics mathematics does not provide barrier height, depletion width, dynamics resistance, rectified voltage and current, which is why the best physicists use semiconductor mathematics for diodes. I can assure you that the best small signal semiconductor mathematics clearly predicts that diodes must rectify natural ambient thermal energy.


PL

Hi PL,

I’m not unfamiliar with semiconductor physics, although it’s been a while since working with it closely. Recall that most equations are based on simplifying assumptions and that most solutions describe only a limited operational interval, out of which their validity is not even assumed to hold true.  We may go through the whole set of equations if you wish but it won’t help much imho.

Instead, let’s keep on basics for a while and then move further, ok?
Here it is, large cracks that apparently went unnoticed/undiscussed:

1. You said that the chip will cool down when generating power. The chip (as well as any single junction within) is still a macroscopic body that comprises a huge number of components so any statistical deviation from thermodynamics is no larger than the odds my dog will play Bach on my piano. Please reconsider the self-cooling issue and either retract or state what will go hot in the setup and based on what macroscopic energy source.

2. You also estimated quite huge and unbelievable power densities (18kW/sqm) given the circumstances. Assume for a moment you have the chip done, 1sqm, placed into full sun (1.2kW/sqm) and you output +10x more of what sun provides. Where is the source that gives you that extra power? Will the technology stop Global Warming? No offense but see the point and huge chain of ironies? It’s hardly believable even by the most optimistic dreamers. Not to mention what would be the explanation for 18kW when one moves the entire setup into shadow and let it reaches thermal (quasi-)equilibrium. Please detail.

3. I can’t see the path for logically deducing that even if the Gaussian model for noise is known of not being accurate that means noise must be rectifiable by a diode. Instead, let’s recall a diode will rectify any signal which is larger than known values, thus crossing its Fermi barrier. But the signal is *outside” of the depletion area within a diode, hence outside the ‘diode’ itself. I therefore fully agree an appropriate diode will rectify the noise from a coil (or from a resistor etc) or even from an identical diode as long as the rectifying one is kept cooler.  But do you have any good reason to believe that a diode will rectify its own thermal noise? Why is that? Any references available? I ask because I can’t see how it could possibly do that self-rectification of its own noise. If it could do that, according to the same thermodynamics again, it will cool itself down to 0K. Please comment.

Cheers,
Tinu

Hi,

Where's your math! I don't even see references. This is my final request. I think this will be a short lived discussion.

QuoteHi PL,

I’m not unfamiliar with semiconductor physics, although it’s been a while since working with it closely. Recall that most equations are based on simplifying assumptions and that most solutions describe only a limited operational interval, out of which their validity is not even assumed to hold true.

"Simplifying *assumptions*"? I don't think you'll find that many physicists who specialize in quantum physics telling you that semiconductor physics is based on *assumptions*.  Please provide a reference.  Perhaps you meant to say "approximations."  All mathematics, including thermodynamics, are approximations.

Quote1. You said that the chip will cool down when generating power. The chip (as well as any single junction within) is still a macroscopic body that comprises a huge number of components so any statistical deviation from thermodynamics is no larger than the odds my dog will play Bach on my piano. Please reconsider the self-cooling issue and either retract or state what will go hot in the setup and based on what macroscopic energy source.

Each diode is considered a separate system. For most diodes (up to microwave diodes), the thermal noise across the depletion region is equal to sqrt(kT/C), where C is the junction capacitance. Each diode converts thermal noise into DC. Multiple diodes aggregate the DC energy.

Quote2. You also estimated quite huge and unbelievable power densities (18kW/sqm) given the circumstances. Assume for a moment you have the chip done, 1sqm, placed into full sun (1.2kW/sqm) and you output +10x more of what sun provides. Where is the source that gives you that extra power? Will the technology stop Global Warming? No offense but see the point and huge chain of ironies? It’s hardly believable even by the most optimistic dreamers. Not to mention what would be the explanation for 18kW when one moves the entire setup into shadow and let it reaches thermal (quasi-)equilibrium. Please detail.

By means of thermal conductivity; e.g., air or liquid flowing over the chip.  ;D

Quote3. I can’t see the path for logically deducing that even if the Gaussian model for noise is known of not being accurate that means noise must be rectifiable by a diode. Instead, let’s recall a diode will rectify any signal which is larger than known values, thus crossing its Fermi barrier. But the signal is *outside” of the depletion area within a diode, hence outside the ‘diode’ itself. I therefore fully agree an appropriate diode will rectify the noise from a coil (or from a resistor etc) or even from an identical diode as long as the rectifying one is kept cooler.  But do you have any good reason to believe that a diode will rectify its own thermal noise? Why is that? Any references available? I ask because I can’t see how it could possibly do that self-rectification of its own noise. If it could do that, according to the same thermodynamics again, it will cool itself down to 0K. Please comment.

It would not cool to 0K -->
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_conductivity

Yes, I have good reason. The best known mathematics that is design to predict semiconductor behavior clearly predicts diodes must rectify natural ambient thermal energy. Furthermore, 12 months of meticulous measurements on ZBD's (zero bias diodes) has always shown a DC voltage. Surely you know how to calculate the noise *current* that flows through the diode depletion region that is solely due to thermal noise, correct?  On my website you can find the mathematics to calculate IS.  Next, you can calculate the diode dynamic resistance based on such noise current with a Gaussian distribution.
Some math for you -->
http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/physics/dirtydetails/
Are you aware of the diode square law. It is well known that the rectified DC voltage produced by a diode is relative to the square of the AC voltage signal across the diode. You can place 1pV rms across a diode and it will still rectify. I've placed less than one microvolt AC across the SMS7630 diode and it still rectified.

BTW, natural temperature gradients is the cause of Johnson noise. You can read just about any good physics textbook to learn that molecules, atoms, charged particles are randomly moving at RT, which could be calculated as temperature gradients.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperature

Math, please. Otherwise it's a pointless discussion based on claims and hand waving -->

PL

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diode
The Shockley ideal diode equation  or the diode law is derived with the assumption  that the only processes giving rise to current in the diode are drift (due to electrical field), diffusion, and thermal recombination-generation. It also assumes   that the recombination-generation (R-G) current in the depletion region is insignificant. This means that the Shockley equation doesn’t account for  the processes involved in reverse breakdown and photon-assisted R-G. Additionally, it doesn’t describe the  â€œleveling off” of the Iâ€"V curve at high forward bias due to internal resistance.

There are many more assumptions, although subtler. Approximations are different. Need a reference? http://www.thefreedictionary.com/approximation
Anyway, this is basics in solid-state physics. You really didn’t know it or just pretended for the sake of your unborn but beloved child?

Now, please don’t throw with math if you don’t know what’s behind equations. As you say it is ‘dirty stuff’ and although I do not agree, I’d add it really pollute physics when missused, as one can see.
Still a diode cooling itself to 0K (thermal insulated, obvious to everyone although apparently not to you) is something nature stubbornly refuses to amaze us.

It’s pointless to go on. I’m out and hand waving.
But good luck, anyway!

Cheers,
Tinu

Where's your math?  ;)

Quote from: tinu on December 10, 2008, 06:50:08 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diode
The Shockley ideal diode equation  or the diode law is derived with the assumption  that the only processes giving rise to current in the diode are drift (due to electrical field), diffusion, and thermal recombination-generation. It also assumes   that the recombination-generation (R-G) current in the depletion region is insignificant. This means that the Shockley equation doesn’t account for  the processes involved in reverse breakdown and photon-assisted R-G. Additionally, it doesn’t describe the  â€œleveling off” of the Iâ€"V curve at high forward bias due to internal resistance.

Your above text is a quote from wikipedia. There's no assumption about the diode equation. I am using Schottky diodes, and it would be incorrect to say that it's an *assumption* the RG current is insignificant. In terms of Schottky diodes, it is a fact. Please read about Schottky diodes and recombination -->
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schottky_diode

It is not included in the equation because it is so insignificant. Like I said, it is an *approximation*, not an *assumption*.  There's no assuming the RG is insignificant in my Schottky diodes. It's a fact.

Quote from: tinu on December 10, 2008, 06:50:08 PMThere are many more assumptions, although subtler. Approximations are different. Need a reference? http://www.thefreedictionary.com/approximation

There are countless known effects. Inductance is an example. Gravity is another example. Tinu, they are insignificant. All physics equations are approximations. It would require an encyclopedia to write down a mathematical equation that considered every single thing that effected the diode. The same applies to the laws of thermodynamics. So what? If you know of a more accurate semiconductor equation then by all means show us. Including RG in the equations is not going to make any difference in terms of diodes rectifying thermal noise.


So where's your math showing how a diode will handle the thermal energy? Physics is not about being 100% perfect. There is no such thing as the *prefect* 100% accurate equation-- as stated, not in semiconductor math or thermodynamics math.  It makes no difference in the result. Diodes rectify thermal energy. It is a know experimental fact that thermal energy causes noise current through the diodes depletion region. So if the diode equation predicts 5e-6 amps, and if you include RG current to make it say 5.00001e-6 amps, then so what? The noise current still flows through the diode. The diode is still a dynamic resistor.


PL

To sum this up, what tinu is saying is pointless. It goes without saying that no mathematical model considers every known effect. Gravity has an effect on the diode. So what?

Tinu has not shown any mathematics that predicts diode behavior with thermal noise. He cannot improve upon the present small signal diode modeling mathematics. It is well known that the recombination and generation in Schottky diodes is insignificant.  Virginia diodes performed measurements on their zero bias diode that clearly shows the diode produces thermal noise in agreement with the predicted values. Sorry tinu, but it's a known fact thermal AC noise current is continuously flowing in a passive diode all by itself. There's your AC noise current. There's your rectification resulting in a DC potential. It's a known fact that the diodes dynamic resistance changes with any change in current-- diode square law. I've verified the diode square law a bit below 1uV, where the diode showed no signs of magically switching from rectification to zero rectification. The diode square law is a live and well. The rectification is relative to the square of the AC noise.

If you doubt a diode does not produce AC noise, then read up, because it was proven with the Virginia Diodes Inc. diode -->

http://www.virginiadiodes.com/VDI/pdf/VDI%20Detector%20Char%20ISSTT2007.pdf


AC current flows through diodes due to thermal noise. The diode square law is well proven to rectify noise below 1uV.  The total Johnson noise, AC, flowing through my SMS7630 diodes @ RT is equal to the kTC noise, which is sqrt(k 300 / 0.14p) = 172 uV.

PL

Just wondering... Could these diodes be made by screenprinting?

I don't see why not, but I've never heard of screenprinting being used for semiconductor fabrication. The common method is to use an ultra thin coating photoresist that is spun on the wafer. Then UV light that shines through a mask lifts the photoresist, which is easily removed. And from there, either deposition or etching is performed.

IMO the photoresist route is a bit much for a low budget garage project, which is why I propose a somewhat older method of using the mask in combination with deposition. You can see an animation I created -->

Watch carefully, as the animation actually changes, albeit at a slow rate:
http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/forum/index.php?topic=18.msg90#msg90

PL

I'm with @tinu on this,,,,  No offence...

IIt's obvious you made a good attempt at theoretical and practical attempts at building the diode array capable of producing what you claim...
But this is an "old" theritory  (please, look at the history...).... I hope you're aware of all the previous attempts (have you read all the posts from, for instance,  Charlie Brown?). How about the other claims from the history, the last 30, 40 years....? Semiconductors... and the  "Maxwellian Daemon"?....

Even if there realy "is something", it must be minuscule... Otherwise, it would be noticed a long time ago... Your prototype diode array "DC readings" are confirming this...

How did you came to the 18kW/m2 number??? Or, the trillions of diodes number??? When was a billion of semiconductor parts limit (on a single chip) acchieved?
What's with the few pV bias Voltage? Where is all the power/energy? Who said your array gets cold? The 2'nd LoT is broken? Really?  ;D
What's next? The 1'st one?
How about the proof?

Why is the simple proof allways the hard part???
???

Quote from: spinner on December 11, 2008, 06:28:06 PM


Why is the simple proof allways the hard part???
???

The proof is in front of you oh blind one. There's a difference between wanting more proof and denying the truth. With the latter all the proof in the world will never stratify you.

Quote from: broli on December 11, 2008, 06:55:09 PM
The proof is in front of you oh blind one. There's a difference between wanting more proof and denying the truth. With the latter all the proof in the world will never stratify you.

;D
Oh, lucky you... You see the proof somewhere? And the little green people?

WHERE IS THE PROOF? A picoAmperes, MegaOhms, nanoJoules, ...Where?

Is it hidden in someone's theory? I have plenty of my own theories, thanks...

Am I the blind one? 8)

spinner,

I'll offer you same the challenge. Show the math.

And I'll offer you the same challenge that I've offered every skeptic --> Have any reputable scientist test my device. I live in Southern California, USA.

For any skeptic who's so sure of their understanding of convention physics, then accept my old challenge --> Lets make a legal business deal. If I'm correct, then you buy it. If I'm wrong, then I'll buy your product. Surely you want to make some $. Lets see how confident the skeptics are.

Sorry to disappoint the skeptics, but the best available mathematics clearly predicts the diode must rectify thermal noise.

PL

QuoteSorry to disappoint the skeptics, but the best available mathematics clearly predicts the diode must rectify thermal noise.

Yep, I think it is possible.  Look up an electron ratchet - they could have a similar effect as well. 

If we could rectify all of the collective outgasing of naysayers, the world be brimming with cheap power, and it'd be more peaceful and quieter too....



TS

Quote from: spinner on December 11, 2008, 06:28:06 PMI hope you're aware of all the previous attempts (have you read all the posts from, for instance,  Charlie Brown?).

Lets make this real. I built four diode arrays. Charles M. Brown had three diode arrays built. Tom Schum built one diode array. That's a total of eight diode arrays. In all eight diode arrays, the voltage meter showed a DC voltage. That's eight for eight. That should give humanity some hope. :)

Quote from: spinner on December 11, 2008, 06:28:06 PMEven if there realy "is something", it must be minuscule... Otherwise, it would be noticed a long time ago... Your prototype diode array "DC readings" are confirming this...

That's why we need a lot of diodes, and it is possible with present technology, and could be affordable, but make no mistake that natural ambient thermal energy density in matter at root temperature is vast. The total energy per degree of freedom equals k*T. One single free electron has three degrees of freedom in motion. Lets consider one free electron per atom. There are ~ 8.5E+28 copper atoms per m^3. So we'll consider one electron per atom, which comes to k*T * 3 * 8.5E+28 = 1.1 billion Joules of energy per m^3. The Sun sustains such energy, but that does not matter because the diode array merely converts such energy into DC, and directs it. The energy is not destroy or created. It's merely moved. Diode arrays would be renewable, clean energy.


PL

Edit: changed example to copper.

Quote from: PaulLowrance on December 11, 2008, 07:31:00 PM
spinner,
I'll offer you same the challenge. Show the math.
And I'll offer you the same challenge that I've offered every skeptic --> Have any reputable scientist test my device. I live in Southern California, USA.

Ooops, the math. .. I'll show you mine when you'll show me yours... OK? ;D
Anyway, the math is "just" a tool, depending on the stuff you want to present or defend.... The physics (our current level of understanding of nature) clearly shows there isn't much to talk about actually breaking "The LAWS"...
Ok, with a decent proof, the world would change instantly...

Quote
For any skeptic who's so sure of their understanding of convention physics, then accept my old challenge --> Lets make a legal business deal. If I'm correct, then you buy it. If I'm wrong, then I'll buy your product. Surely you want to make some $. Lets see how confident the skeptics are.

Geee... I'm not interested in your challenge... Why? Because I trust all those millions of technicians, engineers, physicists,... and the the rest of devoted individuals who were dealing with this kind of stuff in the past.... Don't get me wrong, there's always a great chance that something important was overlooked, but such chances are rather low when it comes to a technology like semiconductors (one of the most thoroughly checked tech in the last few decades)...  Yes, looking through the glasses of a classical thermodynamics....

Quote
Sorry to disappoint the skeptics, but the best available mathematics clearly predicts the diode must rectify thermal noise.

PL

OK, I'll byte... Which math equation clearly shows the thermal energy gain  of a single diode (or PN junction?)?
Rectifying is a circular process, you need to observe it as such...
I came from the old school... Enlighten me, please... I'm prepared to learn!

Quote from: TechStuf on December 11, 2008, 08:37:38 PM
If we could rectify all of the collective outgasing of naysayers, the world be brimming with cheap power, and it'd be more peaceful and quieter too....
TS

Yep, Mitch, you're correct... Plenty of wasted power if you consider all the energy spend by the "naysayers", "blind believers", .."politicians", ..  "religious zealots",.. etc,etc..

The world would be more peaceful and quieter..?. Yes!

 All matter is energy as well as all matter emits energy. We couldn't touch it, see it, hear it, taste it or smell it if it wasn't. The vibarnce is what makes all this possible.

I don't think that some of you have realized what Paul has discovered. The natural emitting vibrance of the matter that makes up a diode is being directed in one direction to give us a usable vibrant source.

We have touched on this topic within other threads but we could not figure out how to tap it. This is a way to tap it and it has been right in front of us all along.

Quote from: spinner on December 12, 2008, 06:47:52 AM
Ooops, the math. .. I'll show you mine when you'll show me yours... OK? ;D

But I already showed my math for a long time -->

http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/physics/dirtydetails/

And you can also see my math in javascript source code -->

http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/tools/customdiodedesigner/

http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/tools/diodenate/

And spice -->

http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/physics/rectificationanalysis/

Quote from: spinner on December 12, 2008, 06:47:52 AMAnyway, the math is "just" a tool, depending on the stuff you want to present or defend.... The physics (our current level of understanding of nature) clearly shows there isn't much to talk about actually breaking "The LAWS"...

And who told you that? There are endless debates occurring amongst conventional physicists on both quantum and classical mechanics, including the very foundations of quantum physics. Yes spinner, some very heated debates. Recently I was observing a heated lengthy debate regarding the new experiment on the lines of the single photon double split experiment, which questions the very foundations of QM.

Quote from: spinner on December 12, 2008, 06:47:52 AMOk, with a decent proof, the world would change instantly

I'm uncertain what world that would that be on?  It's certainly not conventional physicists on Earth.  ;)

Quote from: spinner on December 12, 2008, 06:47:52 AMI'm not interested in your challenge... Why? Because I trust all those millions of technicians, engineers, physicists,... and the the rest of devoted individuals who were dealing with this kind of stuff in the past.

And who might that be?  Send them over here.  I've probably talked to them. Guess what? They can't show the semiconductor math to prove their claim. Even the claimed genius, the creator of LTspice, Mike Englehardt, says that the semiconductor mathematics shows that I am correct, that diodes would rectify Johnson noise.

Classical mechanics lasted 400 years! And I can assure you that quantum mechanics will have a much shorter life span. It's days are numbered. Same goes for the laws of thermodynamics.


If you're wondering why conventional physics is having difficulty with the diode effect -->

http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/physics/stillunknown/

Quote from: spinner on December 12, 2008, 06:47:52 AMOK, I'll byte... Which math equation clearly shows the thermal energy gain  of a single diode (or PN junction?)?
Rectifying is a circular process, you need to observe it as such...
I came from the old school... Enlighten me, please... I'm prepared to learn!

I'll do even better. I'll show you the entire numerical analysis mathematics. Just go to the following web page, and have your web browser display the html source code. The html contains javascript where you'll find all of the mathematics -->

http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/tools/diodenate/


PL

I forgot to mention that if you want to see a lot of mathematics then go to my custom diode designer -->

http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/tools/customdiodedesigner/

PL

Hi PL,

http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/physics/dirtydetails/
“Solving the DC voltage produced by the above diode is solvable only by means of numerical analysis.”

I’m glad to learn that solving is eventually ...solvable  ;) but it’s finally of no help:
A diode does not rectify its own thermal noise. Period.
Moreover, for the sake of clarity: the noise of a diode is AC, not DC. Same period again.

Please prove the above wrong in an attempt to save the modeling, which is wrong. It’s the second time I kindly ask to show some references about the above.
And please show respect to thermodynamics as long as it is valid.

Cheers,
Tinu

QuoteThe world would be more peaceful and quieter..?. Yes!

Since I was merely advocating that the outgassing of pessimistic naysayers be harnessed, and you, spinner, seem to be advocating that everyone in the world be made silent.....


Let me humbly suggest that you take that first bold step and watch for the world to follow.


Didn't think so....


TS

Quote from: tinu on December 12, 2008, 03:26:18 PM
Hi PL,

http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/physics/dirtydetails/
“Solving the DC voltage produced by the above diode is solvable only by means of numerical analysis.”

I’m glad to learn that solving is eventually ...solvable  ;) but it’s finally of no help:
A diode does not rectify its own thermal noise. Period.
Moreover, for the sake of clarity: the noise of a diode is AC, not DC. Same period again.

Please prove the above wrong in an attempt to save the modeling, which is wrong. It’s the second time I kindly ask to show some references about the above.
And please show respect to thermodynamics as long as it is valid.

Cheers,
Tinu

Sorry tinu, but I've shown my math, and my experiments. You have shown nothing.  I'm uninterested in your ambiguous handwaving discussion.

PL

Hi PL,

I’ve shown you my physics.  ;D

Why are you so bothered?
Is it because you probably never considered that mistake about self rectification of own noise or because you can not explain exceeding Carnot? Of course you can’t exceed it. Nobody can.
Or may it be because you want to make a business in OU, a workable forum or something similar and I might jeopardize your marketing and recruitment campaign? Don’t worry; I won’t come into your forum. But for now you are the one here, promoting hardly a physical non-sense.

I’m not interested either in talking to you from now on. I still reserve my right to express my views for the members of this forum.

Cheers,
Tinu

Quote from: tinu on December 12, 2008, 07:01:23 PMI’ve shown you my physics.  ;D

Sorry, I don't consider handwaving as "physics."

Quote from: tinu on December 12, 2008, 07:01:23 PMWhy are you so bothered?
Is it because you probably never considered that mistake about self rectification of own noise or because you can not explain exceeding Carnot? Of course you can’t exceed it. Nobody can.
Or may it be because you want to make a business in OU, a workable forum or something similar and I might jeopardize your marketing and recruitment campaign? Don’t worry; I won’t come into your forum. But for now you are the one here, promoting hardly a physical non-sense.

I’m not interested either in talking to you from now on. I still reserve my right to express my views for the members of this forum.

Cheers,
Tinu

I'm not bothered by you what so ever, or your handwaving. ;D  If you ever decide to show some mathematics, then let me know. I have shown my math and experiments at my website. You have shown nothing but negativity and handwaving. Lets see your improved semiconductor mathematics. Good luck to you.


To other people. From day one of my research, which was posted at peswiki, I have clearly stated I will not accept money. I am not in the business of making money with my diode array or magnetic research, or my website, but to help this world as much as possible at my sacrifice. You will never find ads at my research website.


To *any* EE or physicist at a University, or any reputable scientist, I would be more than happy to allow you to analyze my diode array.


PL

Hi all,

I questioned from the beginning the validity of the so called proof of ‘diode array’ setup. There is no mathematical proof and the physics employed to understand the device has major cracks. Nonetheless, beyond everything the most solid and the ultimate proof is the experiment and we all could read that the experiments were a success, confirming the theory. Hence, I’ve just start studying the evidences.

But, there is only one very tiny chart(!) available at:
http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/experiments/charts/linechart1.html

Although data is very summary, one may read bellow the chart:
“Before "day 1" in the above chart, the voltage was well over 100uV DC. The diode arrays DC voltage began to drop after rapidly increasing the diode arrays temperature by ~ 30F. After ~ three days the voltage fell to it's lowest point, 10.5 uV. For ~ 3 to 4 afterward, the diode array voltage increased by a slight amount. From there, the voltage began to increase at a faster rate. The data was not logged. “

The bold part unfortunately shows that the experiment does not confirm the theory and consequently, the theory shall be considered wrong. That’s because a diode matrix that would rectify thermal noise (which is proportional with the temperature) should increase its output voltage when temperature increases but the experiment clearly shows the opposite.

Sorry for the bad news,
Tinu

Quote from: tinu on December 12, 2008, 07:23:24 PM
Hi all,

I questioned from the beginning the validity of the so called proof of ‘diode array’ setup. There is no mathematical proof and the physics employed to understand the device has major cracks. Nonetheless, beyond everything the most solid and the ultimate proof is the experiment and we all could read that the experiments were a success, confirming the theory. Hence, I’ve just start studying the evidences.

But, there is only one very tiny chart(!) available at:
http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/experiments/charts/linechart1.html

Although data is very summary, one may read bellow the chart:
“Before "day 1" in the above chart, the voltage was well over 100uV DC. The diode arrays DC voltage began to drop after rapidly increasing the diode arrays temperature by ~ 30F. After ~ three days the voltage fell to it's lowest point, 10.5 uV. For ~ 3 to 4 afterward, the diode array voltage increased by a slight amount. From there, the voltage began to increase at a faster rate. The data was not logged. “

The bold part unfortunately shows that the experiment does not confirm the theory and consequently, the theory shall be considered wrong.

That's just more of your claims that are void of mathematics.

Quote from: tinu on December 12, 2008, 07:23:24 PMThat’s because a diode matrix that would rectify thermal noise (which is proportional with the temperature) should increase its output voltage when temperature increases but the experiment clearly shows the opposite.

Sorry for the bad news,
Tinu

More handwaving, as you clearly distort the truth.


Perhaps tinu's goal is to prevent people from replicating the diode array. :)  So how are they going to stop me when I build semiconductor fabrication equipment. Is that when I get a bullet in my head?


PL

Quote from: PaulLowrance on December 12, 2008, 07:26:55 PMPerhaps tinu's goal is to prevent people from replicating the diode array. :)

Mostly to inflate the ego by serving postings with bile as dressing. Not the only one in this forum. Please ignore (this posting also  ;D).

QuoteMostly to inflate the ego by serving postings with bile as dressing. Not the only one in this forum. Please ignore (this posting also  ;D).

Thanks for the good advice. I'll just remind them, on occasion, that they're posting claims void of mathematics.

It's been 14 days since the last diode array measurement. I just took the measurement. I don't have time to post the number with the comment since I'm watching "Whale wars" and the commercial just ended.

Later,
PL

Why does it work a all?  The diode array that is?

There used to be a nice replication of Tesla's Radiant Energy collector on the web - can't find it now but was a nice detailed experiment - successfull one at that.  Showed a nice slow charging of a cap for free.


You could probably see this charge building with a high impedence meter like a VTVM - I'll have to try that.  Energy collected would be related to size of collector and possibly to it's mass as well as it's elevation.

Hi,

It works by rectifying thermal noise that flows in and out of the diodes depletion region. The diode is a dynamic resistor, where the depletion region varies depending on the amount of current. The idea that diodes do not rectify below a voltage threshold is utter nonsense. Any good EE knows full well that diodes rectify at *all* applied AC voltages. Below Vt, the thermal voltage, which is ~ 26mV at RT, the diode square laws is rather accurate, which states that the DC voltage produced by AC is relative to the square of the applied AC voltage.

BTW, you have to be very careful with such experiments because of radio waves. I have spent 12 months now, and have the system down well. Such measurements ***must*** be inside metal shields. I use at least two metal shields. The inner shield is ~ 7". The outer shield is ~ 1ft. Also, the diode array must be compact, no open wires that will pick up external fields.

I've conducted such experiments at countless locations in completely rural areas. In canyons, caves, long tunnels inside mountains. The measured DC voltages are real.

BTW, I'm still typing the big news, after Stargate Atlantis tv show, and it is BIG NEWS!

PL

Place the entire device inside a soleneoid coil connected to DC of 24v vertical orientation - does the "thermal noise" increase?

As stated 14 days ago, tonight is the scheduled 156 diode array measurement. It was the big one, the one that could determine the mystery behind TEDE.

Big news for diode array research -->

http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/forum/index.php?topic=60.0

PL

I was wondering if this effect has anything in common with the T.T. Brown experiments on rock batteries.
The Petroelectric Effect.

An interesting effect I noticed while working on the Dr. Stiffler circuits.
I replicated the first circuits he built and I noticed that the more diodes I had in series the higher the voltage I got.
I would get to a certain voltage and then the voltage would stop increasing.
When I used LED's for the diodes the maximum I could reach was about 98 volts, and then the LED's started burning out.
I had about 40 blue LED's connected in series.

I disconnected the old circuit and tried building his latest circuit but I didn't get this same effect anymore.
Seems something about the old circuit caused this effect. The circuit that used the AM antenna.

QuoteI was wondering if this effect has anything in common with the T.T. Brown experiments on rock batteries.
The Petroelectric Effect.

Thanks for the info. I didn't know T Brown worked on rock batteries. I know John Hutchison is known for his rock batteries in addition to his custom made crystal batteries -->

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNeshiY4ixI

Also Marcus Reid has similar types of batteries. I firmly believe such batteries are made of countless *natural* microscopic diodes. Remember, a diode is formed when two different elements come in contact, *any* two elements. It does not have to be silicon. Of course, some elements are better than others.

There's one active thread at this forum on the John Hutchison and Marcus Reid batteries where people are making their own. In fact, for over the past ... oh at least 6 months I've been doing some similar experiments on normal batteries such as Alkaline, where the Alkaline batteries have been electrically shorted the entire time. The goal is to see if there's a base minimum DC voltage and current the batteries reach. It is a known fact that all *real* matter, especially Alkaline batteries have countless natural diodes. The goal would be to get more diodes aligned in one direction. I theorized that a voltage potential could cause the diodes to align while the material is extremely hot. If the materials not hot, then perhaps over the years ambient thermal energy could slowly cause a small percentage of the atoms to migrate for diode alignments as they are influenced by batteries voltage. So what I'm thinking is that the natural diodes in the battery will cause a net DC current, which will slowly charge the battery.

Shorting various types of batteries is about the extent of my diode battery experiments. One of these days I would like to connect my highly sensitive temperature gradient meter to see if the battery cools down. Here's the three cycles in such an experiment -->

1. Shorted the diode battery.
2. Connect a load to the battery.
3. Leave the battery disconnected-- open circuit.

And repeat the experiment while trying various amounts of resistance in step 2.  The temperature probe is touching the battery during all of the tests to see if and when the battery temperature drops below ambient temperature. Anyone can build this temperature gradient circuit and probe for about $10 to $20. You need two small thermistors (I paid $0.15 each at digikey.com), two fets (I'm using NTE452), three op-amps, and some R's and C's. You can detect temperature gradients less than 10uC (1/100000 C).

Most of the people in the Hutchison battery thread are getting power levels high enough relative to the size of the baked battery to detect a temperature drop. I have sent a private PM to two of the guys there. I don't know why they're not pursuing that simple measurement. They may think the energy is not coming from natural ambient thermal energy, but I disagree.

Here's a small outline of my diode battery page -->

http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/physics/diodebattery/

PL

I've been experimenting with crystal batteries as well, I have a few posts in the Hutchison Cell thread.
T.T. Brown was the first to discover the effect in Basalt and Granite.
Strangely I can't find the website anymore were it showed diagrams and explained his findings.
Mining companies used his Rock Battery to search for minerals.
The voltage given off by the rock changes as it is moved across different landscapes.
Also he found that the position of the moon effected the voltage output.
Which suggests that the effect is gravity related.
A link that may be useful:
http://www.rexresearch.com/brown4/brown4.htm

An idea that comes to mind regarding this thread is Electrets.
If we made a negative electret and a positive electret and placed them together, wouldn't they act like diodes?
Place thousands of electrets together in parallel and series and make a similar device to the diode device.
Cabana Wax can be made into an electret and is easy to work with. 
Probably glue gun glue sticks could be heated and charged.
I guess this is a little off topic, but it may be an idea for another thread.
Maybe someone already started one on this, I don't know.
What puzzles me is why no one ever tried making a capacitor with an electret for the dielectric.
The cap would always maintain a charge.

Hi, PaulLowrance!

I see you're seriously involved with the "diode rectification of a thermal noise"
(A 2n'dLoT breaker?)

You're familiar with my views. No point for me to interfere with your discoveries in the future? I give up, you made a personal quest towards those goals, and I applaud you for this...



Johnson's noise rectification.. Diode arrays...?

With an electronic component miniaturisation, this "effect" gets allmost lost. More small component (semiconductor die chips), less "Johnson's  noise" effect. And It becomes even a minor problem with digital circuits (no more analog consistency needed. (Where the thermal noise becomes less important than with the analog circuits...)

Anyway...
Have you considered a double action (bipolar transistor) effect of Johnson's? Instead of a diode, you use an old tech (bipolar) transistor in a double diode connection? Collector/emitter wired together and base as the other electrode? It has a MORE than doubled effect on a Johnson's noise generation...

It works fine with the solar transistor circuits...

It works fine as the very effective "Johnson's noise" generator (if biased)...

So, take a few hundred bipolar transistors in an array (SMD versions are taking less space than diodes) and see what you'll came up with....

As the Johnson's noise is mostly related with a quantity of PN semiconductor material in a component involved (mostly High power or old low tech components...), it may be worth to try an  arrays of the early chips (like s-rams)....

Cheers!

Quote from: spinnerJohnson's noise rectification.. Diode arrays...? With an electronic component miniaturisation, this "effect" gets allmost lost.

That's untrue. Take two objects made of the same thing. It could be anything, say carbon. Object #1 dimensions are X, Y, Z. Object #2 dimensions are X/2, Y/2, Z/2.  Object #2 has half the length, but one forth the cross sectional area. Therefore, the resistance of object #2 is twice of #1. Johnson noise is equal to sqrt(k * T * R * B). The only parameter that's different in the equation between object #1 and #2 is R, where the smaller object, #2, has twice the resistance. Therefore, the smaller object has sqrt(2) ~= 1.414 times more Johnson noise.

Although, the raw Johnson noise equation does not consider the bandwidth limiting parallel capacitance. Therefore we need to consider kTC noise, which equals sqrt(k * T / C). In this case, the only difference is parallel capacitance. Object #1 has four times the cross sectional area (four times C), but object #2 is half as thin (two times more C). Therefore, the smaller object, #2, has half the capacitance as object #1. Therefore, object #2, the smaller resistor, has half the capacitance. Therefore, the total noise for the smaller object is equal to kTC noise, which is caused by Johnson noise, equals sqrt(2) ~= 1.414 times the larger object.

So, in the end, the smaller object has sqrt(2) ~= 1.414 times more thermal noise.


A technical detailed science discuss without mathematics leads to ambiguity. That is why scientists throughout history have always exchanged letters containing mathematics, as it is difficult to argue with a math equation. If the person believes the math is incorrect, then he or she has the right to correct it.

PL

Hi AbbaRue,

I haven't studied electrets that much. Here's wikipedia on it -->

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electret

An Electret is equivalent to a permanent magnet, except it's an electric field instead of magnetic field. I think the reason they don't make capacitors with Electrets is the same reason they don't use PM's for the inductive material in inductors. The reason being is that a PM has exceptionally low permeability, and the Electret has exceptionally low permittivity.

Regards,
PL

I just added a bunch of voltage measurements taken in Oct. 2008 on the 156 diode array. And another thread on 52 diode array voltage measurements.

Scroll down to see "Recent Posts"
http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/forum/


PL

Quote from: PaulLowrance on December 13, 2008, 11:19:25 AM
Thanks for the info. I didn't know T Brown worked on rock batteries. I know John Hutchison is known for his rock batteries in addition to his custom made crystal batteries -->

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNeshiY4ixI

Also Marcus Reid has similar types of batteries. I firmly believe such batteries are made of countless *natural* microscopic diodes. Remember, a diode is formed when two different elements come in contact, *any* two elements. It does not have to be silicon. Of course, some elements are better than others.

Well I think you're right there, or at least not far off at all. :)
Also, I thought you had read a lot of the Crystal Cell thread, there it is pointed out that Browns Cells, Hutchisons Cells, Reids Cells, are all considered
to be variations on the same theme, albeit with slightly different functional principles and often totally different materials. But perhaps I never really
pointed it out to you personally when we exchanged PMs? Well, anyway, I think there is a link.
And indeed I believe all such Cells basically have similar microdiode structures (or at least structural elements that behave more or less like diodes).

If we had a method of producing surfaces covered in diode array layers, effectively a huge number of rectifying diode bridges in the form of a large
surface film, that would be a great starting point for just about any ambient energy powered "battery".

Imagine just a layer of this stuff connected on the output side to a stack of small supercaps around which the film is wound, and then coated
in a layer that is perfectly suited to absorb specific wavelengths like infrared for example... That setup would effectively be a "battery" which
continually "recharges" itself from the heat of its environment.
The coating could be selected for whichever wavelength is most common in the specific local environment. The recent infrared microantenna film
springs to mind as an example of such a coating.

QuoteThere's one active thread at this forum on the John Hutchison and Marcus Reid batteries where people are making their own. In fact, for over the past ... oh at least 6 months I've been doing some similar experiments on normal batteries such as Alkaline, where the Alkaline batteries have been electrically shorted the entire time. The goal is to see if there's a base minimum DC voltage and current the batteries reach. It is a known fact that all *real* matter, especially Alkaline batteries have countless natural diodes. The goal would be to get more diodes aligned in one direction. I theorized that a voltage potential could cause the diodes to align while the material is extremely hot. If the materials not hot, then perhaps over the years ambient thermal energy could slowly cause a small percentage of the atoms to migrate for diode alignments as they are influenced by batteries voltage. So what I'm thinking is that the natural diodes in the battery will cause a net DC current, which will slowly charge the battery.

Hmmm... interesting idea... inspired by the "electrinium" story of the reacted battery sludge being "electrinium" material, by any chance? ;)
And natural diodes inside alkaline batteries... well... yes they're semiconductive compounds after reaction, but aren't most of those such
bad semiconductors that they don't really work as diodes untill relatively high voltages are applied? As far as I recall, only PbS is among
the more sensitive compound semiconds and that only occurs in batteries using lead and sulfuric acid... And then the internal polarisation
of the "microdiode" molecumes would appear to be opposed to the direction of electron flow inside the battery... Or am I off there?
Anyway, interesting idea. Lol and also fairly clear what thread I usually hang around in eh? ;) ;D

QuoteShorting various types of batteries is about the extent of my diode battery experiments. One of these days I would like to connect my highly sensitive temperature gradient meter to see if the battery cools down. Here's the three cycles in such an experiment -->

1. Shorted the diode battery.
2. Connect a load to the battery.
3. Leave the battery disconnected-- open circuit.

And repeat the experiment while trying various amounts of resistance in step 2.  The temperature probe is touching the battery during all of the tests to see if and when the battery temperature drops below ambient temperature. Anyone can build this temperature gradient circuit and probe for about $10 to $20. You need two small thermistors (I paid $0.15 each at digikey.com), two fets (I'm using NTE452), three op-amps, and some R's and C's. You can detect temperature gradients less than 10uC (1/100000 C).

Most of the people in the Hutchison battery thread are getting power levels high enough relative to the size of the baked battery to detect a temperature drop. I have sent a private PM to two of the guys there. I don't know why they're not pursuing that simple measurement. They may think the energy is not coming from natural ambient thermal energy, but I disagree.

Well to be honest you never really put it this clearly in your PMs.
You did show up all of a sudden with a lot of text on calorimetrics, but we never really had a good deep discussion as to what exactly powers them, did we?
The indications on some of the Reid Cells were that they continued to work and produce very low amp output untill cooled below what was it, minus 200 degrees C
I seem to recall. That was not my observation, it was tested and observed by a third party and confirmed witness. The output did drop and the drop increased
with lower temperatures, untill at that temp it finally stopped producing output altogether. Or at least, as I recall; to be entirely sure I'd need to look up the test
report. Anyway, that would seem to indicate that at least some part of the output is not dependant upon temperature, and certainly that it is not all galvanic
reactions that produce the output because those just stop at what minus 20 degrees already? And I seem to recall that that was the main argument in
the little PM exchange we had back then, whether or not it was anything galvanic.
I am not opposed to the idea of the energy input coming from the environment in some way. Ambient heat is a good source, fine with me.
But gravitational fluctuations are also fine. I don't need it to be heat input per se. The important part is that we don't want anything galvanic going on.
;)

All that aside, I like your diode array initiative and if we can work out a practical method to produce micro diode arrays
with highly sensitive pn junctions and incorporated isolated output electrode networks, that would be grand! :)

Best regards,
Koen

Hi there,

InSb would be a good choice, but all materials act as diodes at all applied voltage levels (mV, uV, pV, fV, etc.).  That's the diode square law, and also it's part of small signal diode modeling. I've placed less than 1uV DC (both polarities) on a silicon diode and it still rectified. Of course you need sensitive equipment to test it.

Thermal noise decreases with a drop in temperature, as you noted, but diode behavior also changes. Diode behavior is non linear through a wide range of temperatures, and there are abrupt changes in diode behavior at specific temperatures (depending on the material), as you noted in the Reid battery. It's difficult to say how a diode will behave at low temperatures, until you measure it. Same goes for high temperatures. So there are a lot of factors involved.

The diode battery (baked batteries, or whatever the name should be) is very intriguing, and anyone could help out with such research. There's an active thread somewhere at this forum. I cannot stress enough how important it is to include low temp gradient measurements, as in micro Celsius changes; i.e., try to see if the battery cools-- I outlined such an experiment in a previous post. The circuit is simple and inexpensive. There are several possibilities, such as the battery could cool while it's recovering (unloaded), or when it's being used (loaded), or when it's shorted. If there are electrochemical reactions, then it's possible the natural microscopic diodes could recharge it while the battery is recovering (unloaded), and thus such a battery would cool while recovering. I would agree that it's best to keep the electrochemical reactions as low as possible, but if testing for battery temperature changes then such electrochemical reactions aren't necessarily a bad thing.

PL

A few days ago I unshorted my small 12V battery. It's smaller than a AAA battery. It's been shorted for several months. It produced 7mV across a 2M ohm voltage meter, and 7nA while shorted on a current meter. So the internal resistance is 1M ohm. Across a matched load it would produce 12pW.

I'll unshort and measure it again in about a week. Not sure when, but it will be announced on my forum calendar.

My interest in shorting common batteries is to see if my battery theory is correct, that natural ambient thermal energy can recharge such batteries. Of course, at some point I'll need to unshort the batteries to see if they become recharged again. The batteries should be stored in a metal shield to prevent external RF interference.

A word of caution. When measuring the dead or baked battery DC voltage, ***please*** don't directly connect the voltage meter across the battery because most voltage meters apply over 0.1 volts DC, which will help charge the dead battery. Remember, at these energy levels it doesn't take much to make a huge difference. The correct way to measure the DC voltage is to place a large *good* capacitor (no electrolytics please) across the battery. I recommend a 4.7uF or higher Mylar. Next, remove the cap. Then measure the caps DC voltage with your voltage meter. The voltage will begin to drop of course. A good voltage meter will have at least 10M ohms impedance. Cheapos often have a few M ohms. At 10M ohm with 4.7uF cap, the voltage will drop by 6% after 3 seconds. So that's good enough. If you have a cheapo DMM, then you may need at least 10pF Mylar cap. You can place the Mylars in-parallel to achieve higher capacitance.


PL

Today I'm a bit excited to make my forum site accept embedded videos directly in threads, any thread. It accepts videos from over 180 video sites such as youtube and google video. Here's my list of the possible top "Smoking Gun" videos -->
http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/forum/index.php?board=27.0

These are self-running machines. Please let me know if I missed any videos. I'm only interested in *serious* videos. Anyone who has earth shattering news as a self-running machine is not going to fiddle around with selling the plans online, or tease people for months on end by dropping tidbits of info while never revealing any substantial details with no big plans of marketing the device.

Here's the thread for questionable videos -->
http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/forum/index.php?topic=77.0

A serious self-runner "free energy" video would include one of the following -->

Option A - The inventor is revealing every detail to replicate the machine.

Option B - The inventor or company is in the process of marketing the device; e.g., Blacklight Power, Steorn.

Thanks for any help,
PL

Today was the scheduled 156 diode array measurement. Some good news -->

http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/forum/index.php?topic=2.0

PL

Yeehaw!  More great diode array news.  Last night was the scheduled 156 diode array measurement. -->

http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/forum/index.php?topic=2.msg182#msg182

The entire forum is viewable by guests except for the diode research area, which requires registration (free). The diode research is intended only for people who are interested enough to spend a minute registering.

Thanks,
PL

you know you could try another interesting experiment. Put the setup in a container hookup the meter. And pour liquid nitrogen on it and see what happens. If your assumptions are right the thermal agitation should decrease dramatically until there's barely any voltage reading. Or doing a reverse experiment. Try blowing a hair dryer on it  ;D.

Thanks for tips broli. Although not to the extremes you've mentioned, I have measured the diode arrays are various temperatures. So far two types of effects have been measured.

1) Effect #1: Temperature - the diode array voltage has consistently changed throughout the day, where it's peak is when the root temp is peak, and minimum when the root temp is minimum.

2) Effect #2: TEDE (thermal equilibrium diode effect), where most (not all) of the diodes DC voltage is reset caused by a rapid change such as in temperature.  TEDE is believed to be caused by flicker noise, which is easily reset by either halting the DC current long enough, or by a rapid change such as temperature. One good example of this was when I took a heat gun to both the 1st and 2nd metal shields. In fact, the heat gun was so hot that it broke. The diode temp must have been over 100F. Anyhow, prior to the heat gun, the diode DC voltage was high, over 0.2mV DC. Almost immediately after applying the heat gun, within a half hour, the DC voltage began to sink like a rock. After about three days or so it sank to 12.4uV DC. After about a week the DC voltage began to slowly rise again until I disturbed the diode array again, which caused it to sink again. It began to rise again, until I disturbed it again, and it sank again. It went to it's lowest to date, which is 6.9uV DC. Now it's been 8 days later and it's up to 21.9uV DC taken from last nights measurements. This shows the signs of flicker noise, which is 1/f noise; i.e., the longer you wait, the higher the noise voltage.

PL

Why is so sensitive to temperature changes? It seems to be acting like an inertial body or even a magnetic field. That is that it heavily opposes change.

That's a good question. I know flicker noise causes charges to become trapped over time, a very slow process. And we're dealing with thermal equilibrium here, so at this level it's a plausible theory that the trapped charges are easily released, which would reset the flicker noise. Remember, flicker noise is a 1/f spectrum. So if the DC current is on for 10 seconds, then that's 0.1 Hz flicker noise. If it's on for 1 hour, then that's 278 uHz flicker noise. 0.1Hz / 278uHz = 360. So the flicker (1/f) noise is a lot higher after 1 hour. If we repeat the 1 hour test again, but interrupt the DC current half way through, then it's no longer 278uHz. Rather, it's 556uHz, which has less flicker noise.

PL

Continuing from my last post, this is uncharted territory, so one can only speculate. Who knows, for all we know it could be a build up of some unknown current, who knows, perhaps etheric current.  ;D

PL

Yep most talk will not bring us far at this stage. What's your current status on the chip fabrication?

The present long term 156 diode array measurements are shedding light on what makes TEDE tick, how to predict it, eliminating some theories while reinforcing other theories.

I don't of anyone who's started making the chip fabrication equipment. No plans yet.

PL

I have to be very careful where my money is spent, since there's not much of it. So I'm still thinking out possible ways of making chip fabrication equipment, but I already outlined one viable method -->

http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/forum/index.php?board=11.0

This method is enough to fabrication custom chips, which includes solar cells. This could be the start of a huge business for anyone while doing some real great service to the world that's in disparate need of solar cells. Also you could fabricate LED's, another booming industry that is now beginning to slowly replace light bulbs. So such semiconductor fabrication equipment has a lot of usefulness.

PL

Last night was the scheduled 12V N-size alkaline battery measurement that has been shorted for several months.
http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/forum/index.php?topic=73.msg200#msg200

PL

what kosol and his minions do with metals,
is exactly what the 2 spinning wheels of a wimhurst machine do.

mixing clockwise magnetism,
and coutner-clockwise magnetism,
into electricity.


the wimhurst does this FAR more efficiently, than mere metal.
unless you can create thousands and thousands of thin layers, of copper-polymer-iron.


the biggest problem with the wimhurst, is preventing the electricity-mixing in the device,
from feeding back into the wheels.

where the electricity feed-back NEGATES the positive polarity stored in one wheel,
and the negative polarity stored in the other wheel.

this feedback KILLS the amperage,
that the whimhurst COULD produce.

Some more good news for the diode array research! -->
http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/forum/index.php?topic=2.0

PL

A person on my website, although anonymous, claims to have replicated my 156 diode array that produced 10uV DC -->
http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/forum/index.php?topic=102.0

More good news. Tonight was the scheduled 156 diode array measurement -->
http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/forum/index.php?topic=2.msg246#msg246

PL

It seems that if you could get the voltage up to above the 1.4v forward drop across the diode array then you could get some useful work out of the thermal noise (AKA Johnson Noise) on the diodes. By the way a guy from Hawaii (CB KUAI (misspelled) on yahoo groups) had a very similar design and as of a few years ago and actually had some chips made

Quote from: hakware on December 30, 2008, 12:18:41 AM
It seems that if you could get the voltage up to above the 1.4v forward drop across the diode array then you could get some useful work out of the thermal noise (AKA Johnson Noise) on the diodes.

That's true, but it's also true that the diode never stops rectifying, even in the nanovolt region. Below the thermal voltage level, which is 26mV at room temperatures, the diode square law is rather accurate. Diode square law is part of conventional physics. Small signal diode modeling mathematics is found at -->

http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/physics/dirtydetails/

PL

Last night was the scheduled 156 diode array measurement. As expected, it produced a DC voltage.

Some more good news occurred last night when Tom Schum wrote the following about his 32x32 1N34A diode array measurements -->

Quote from Tom Schum:

QuoteI guess the data appears conclusive, but during the taking of the data the numbers jumped around so much I was confused.

What Tom is referring to as jumping around is +/- 0.2uV out of 1uV DC. As I detailed for Tom in email, his microvolt meter could only be responsible for producing roughly 0.02uV DC at most on the diode array, due to bias current. Tom's initial reasoning for calling the results inconclusive was based on the term "accuracy."  As explained to Tom, it does not matter if the results were 1% off or 50% off. The fact remains that his microvolt meter is fully capable of detecting the change in DC voltage when reversing the input polarity. There was no doubt that his voltage meter was measuring a DC voltage, but the exact DC voltage is more difficult to pin point due to the voltage meters output noise. So the next step for Tom would have been to take his diode array out to rural areas to verify that the DC voltage was not due to external RF signals.

As far as my electrometer, there are no such fluctuations. At most, on rare occurrences, it will fluctuation about 2uV DC, but usually does not fluctuation more than 0.5uV DC. Also, my electrometer resolution is 0.5uV DC, and the 156 in-series SMS7630 diode array has produced up to 204uV (0.204mV) DC.  Every possible effect has been explained in my web forum. Twelve months of always measuring a DC voltage while trying every different type of test to help explain where the DC voltage has led to one answer, that small signal semiconductor mathematics based on quantum physics is correct, that diodes *must* rectify ambient thermal noise.



PL

I created a thread, title What to do IF you invent a "Free Energy" machine

http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/forum/index.php?topic=120.0

i was reading another thread, where the guy was charging a capacitor using earth ground, and 2 series of diodes.
1 in and 1 out..

so i placed 5 diodes in series, x4 sets in parallel.  Each row of 5 is connected to the next with a single diode, to keep current biased in one direction.
at the front, i attached an antennae, and 1 more diode, facing from earth ground INTO the front of the array.
the diodes go to 1 leg of the capacitor.
then i have 10 diodes from the other leg to earth ground. (heading out)
Across the entire array from the antennae to earth ground i have a steady 0.07v (70 millivolts)
i cant measure the impedance of the circuit, i just know that it exceeds 1MOhm, so there is LESS THAN 30 picoamps flowing through this circuit

This circuit will charge 2 capacitors up to 1.5v, in 45secs to 1 min.

Capacitors are::  50v 10 uF     and  100v  100 uF
charge time seems to be he same between the 2, but they ARE connected in parallel.

my larger capacitor (4700uF) will charge up to 300mv after sitting for 1 hr in the circuit.

it seems to max out in either case, but this is thousands of times more energy that is being discussed with a simple diode array.  Something to think about....

Hi sm0ky2,

Yes, there are earth energies, natural and mad-made. The only problem is that they can vary from location to location.  The great thing about diodes rectifying ambient thermal energy is that it does not vary from location to location, with the exception of ambient temperature of course. Often one has to actually go out of their way to detect such earth energies; e.g., a long wire or antenna. I never saw Earth energies in my diode array, but to be certain I use an extremely small diode array, two layers metal shields, and place the diode array inside an oil bath.

PL

QuotePaul

Did you tested ever, cool down the whole diode array with liquid nitrogen meantime testing the output?

No. To *properly* perform that type of test could take years to fine tune, if it's even possible with present technology. The reason being is that the entire setup (including the electrometer) would have to be cool as well. Otherwise the thermoelectric DC voltages would be in the measurable range. Also, such a test would still be inconclusive because diode *behavior* changes with temperature. So we would not know if the drop in DC voltage was due to a drop in ambient thermal energy or diode behavior.

IMO, it would be far easier and cheaper to just build home brew semiconductor fabrication equipment, build a diode array chip, place under appropriate resistive load, and test to see if the chip temperature drops.

http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/forum/index.php?board=11.0

Also, such home brew semiconductor fabrication equipment could easily allow one to make their own affordable solar cells, and even LED's. Someone gave me some papers on a students University lab sheets provided by the professor that shows how to make LED's using home brew semiconductor fabrication equipment that the professor made. They use a simple rotary pump in-series with a diffusion pump to make the vacuum. They deposit the material, and use a tungsten coil to heat it up. The materials atoms inside the vacuum will evaporate onto the wafer. I'll try to upload those papers sometime this week.

PL

Quote from: Chef on January 06, 2009, 10:54:17 AMDon't you think the diode behaviour directly connected to ambient thermal energy?

Diode behavior is not linear with temperature. Every diode is different. The peak rectifying efficiency is different for each diode. One type of diode may peak at 120F, while another at 150F, while another at 80F. I'm certain it's possible to build diodes that have a peak at -50F. So if the temp is 80F, and you drop the temp in such a diode, then the rectified DC voltage would actually increase.

Also, when you start getting down into very low temperatures, below 200K (-100F) there can be sudden changes in the materials. It is expected that there would be appreciable changes in diode behavior at various low temperatures. So it's nearly impossible to tell if the drop in DC voltage from rectification is due to a drop in ambient thermal energy or a change in diode behavior.

Also, it is possible that the diode has multiple rectifying peaks. There could be various rectifying peaks at such low temperatures.

PL

It's been a while, and have made a lot more DC voltage measurements on the 156 in-series SMS7630 diode array since last in this thread. It's all nothing but great news, and is revealing the true nature of diodes. Last night ended the 156 diode array measurements while connected to a 2M ohm load. Tonight's scheduled 156 diode array measurement is the start of new measurements with no-load while connected to only the 4.7uF Mylar capacitor. Actually all caps have parallel resistance. I'm guesstimating this Mylar is about 5G ohms parallel resistance.

It appears the diode array DC voltage stability increases as the load resistance increases. The 2M ohm measurements were rather stable, or about as stable as one could expect from rectifying purely random noise. We'll have to see how stable it is with exceptionally high resistance load. Also the DC voltage is expected to increase over time, as it appears that the increased trapped carriers over time from flicker noise increases the diodes small signal resistance, which in turn increases the diodes thermal noise. If true, then diodes slowly adjust to the load resistance, which would be cool (pun intended  :)). Also, it appears that the rectifying efficiency increases with an increase in resistance. I'm taking a massive guesstimate that the diode array could approach 50mV DC across the Mylar capacitor, that is if it's around 5G ohms.

Hmm, dare even say that if this trend holds true, that the 156 diode array could produce enough light to be seen inside a dark room across a 1T ohm LED?

All data measurements and comments are found at my forum.

Regards,
PL