One of the most basic concepts which proves or disproves the existence of electrical energy in the ether all around us is that of an energy receiver similar to Tesla's ideas on the subject. It can take various forms, but common ones are wires and flat panels.
Similar to solar panels, the flat variety are supposed to work at all times of the day or night because the electrical energy or cosmic power is always around everywhere all the time.
Does anyone have any data that shows conclusively how much energy per square inch has been able to be captured in real world experiments?
I can give two answer to the question !
If you want to know the theoretical/experimental energy receiver max-potential I recommend
the study of all Joseph C.Yater patents(special attention: US4004210,page7,line 8-10;
EP0634055,page23,line20-23
US562311,page8,line60-67/page11,line 47-54/page15,line 3-6
then the visit of the Borealis.com webpage and their technical summery
(reference:Stanford experiment =Yater work approvement !).
If you want to know about "ambient energy capture potential" I recommend to think about this
test/experiment:Eastgermany,Dr.Helmut Reichelt et al.
room,20 sqm floor area,60sqm of the room walls and tect are covered with a therm-ionic/-ovoltaic cell:
Conversion effect:ambient/room temperature decrease from 27 degree C to 23 degree C,
and transversion of this energy as 60X80Wh(=per sqm) ergo 4800Watth !?
The NL SPACE-BOX with 18-22 sqm floor area is equipped with a 1300 Watth heater,
only an idea to compare this values,winter- natural outside/wished ambient inside-temperature amplitude !
Sincerely
? ? ? ? ? ? de Lanca
Thank you for the response.
However, this is part of the problem that plagues the whole New Energy Movement. While I don't doubt that you may very well know the answers, the thing we non-scientists need is simple, straight, bottom-line answers to our questions. In fact, I'm sorry but I didn't really understand half of what you wrote.
Those of us in business will never be able to promote anything if we don't have clear, hard facts. We do not have time nor interest in redoing the research that others surely have already done. We really don't want to be research scientists. I personally believe that if an inventor has discovered something of value, he should have the facts and figures to show for it.
In the case of the Tesla-type receiver panel, the idea has been around for aproximately one hundred years. That begs the question of why we don't use it. The answer to that question becomes apparent when we have the answers to my original questions.
It is sort of like asking how long a gas-saving device has been in use in the inventor's own car, and how much he spends on gas and how many miles he's driven. The figures speak for themselves.
Like Friday used to say, "Just the facts, maam".
Thanks again.
Tesla- sphere,ambient,ground,wire,flat panel:
GB198467,Electric Power Accumulator,Gilbert Adam Bartholomew,1923
or Don Adsitt ambient power? modules
But do not expect KWH en masse !
Sincerely
? ? ? ? ? ? de Lanca? ?
Thanks.
These devices either are not listed on the Internet as being used currently, or they put out too little power, as you pointed out.
We need something that actually powers a house now. I doubt that there is any such thing in the category of electricity receivers. What I think is that we need to use something like BingoFuel to power an engine to drive a generator to power the house. That is available now, so maybe that is what we all should be using. It's a thought.
Pardon,I recuse !
All alternative fuels based on Water/Hydrogen are not usefull for the existent combustion engines !
We would get -in a short time-corrosion problems !
The idea of alternative solutions to crude oil is right,but there is also the need of appropriate
-modified-engines !
At first the only solutions are to use Synfuels and? Biofuels(f.e. Microdiesel,Uni Muenster).
The time parallel action will be to extract CO2 and convert it!(f.e.Holcoumb,NZL)
Sincerely
? ? ? ? ? ? de Lanca
p.s.:Some people should begin to think about their lifestyle-their consume habit-,
? ? ? because there is a great difference between effective use and real-"non sense" use
? ? ? of our anytimes not endless or non fast available resourches !?
? ? ?
I agree with you. I think that we need to learn to be more efficiient in our demands for energy. I personally struggle with the computers I operate continually. One does not want to think about the amount of electricity that is used while they are running. However, that is part of the solution supposedly offered by the promise of free energy. If we can tap into some naturally occurring huge reserve, then the use of it becomes unimportant.
By the way, I believe that the type of carbonaceous hydrogen fuels, like Bingo Fuel, may not be as damaging to the existing engines as you point out, but I may be incorrect in that assumption. On the other hand, a more efficient engine other than the piston engine is long past due. We are probably looking at a combination of solutions to solve our overall problem.
Nothing against piston engines,we can convert them to H2-engines(f.e.BMW,OTTO-MOTOR) or
e-piston-motors !
The point that I posted and which you probably not understand-
"to compare the values"-:
How many Watts are normally the physical need to increase the room /ambient temperature from 23 degrees C to 27 degrees C ?(Inverse view of the Dr.H.Reichelt experiment)
K-/U-/R-value dependant calculations !?
The NL Space-box with same test room dimensions:? -only-with an 1300W heater !!!
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 4800W to 1300W(option:heat-/friction-pump)
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? and a circuit closing !
Sincerely
? ? ? ? ? ? de Lanca
Quote from: lancaIV on January 25, 2006, 08:28:27 PM
Pardon,I recuse !
All alternative fuels based on Water/Hydrogen are not usefull for the existent combustion engines !
We would get -in a short time-corrosion problems !
You mean as in water corrosion radiator type problems cured by propylene glycol additive? So don't use a cast iron engine block, fer cryin' out loud. Seems to me that aluminum engine blocks are what's curently in use.
Not to mention that we're using injection combustion as opposed to carbureted combustion, which is a second strike against your theoretical fear. In a combustion chamber that fires off hydrogen in the same manner as a acetylene torch, the water doesn't happen until after it's in the exhaust system.
Besides, there's a type of hydrogen vehicle in the process of development that utilizes the hydrogen to generate electricity, which drives either an all-electric motor or a petrol/electric hybrid motor.
When we think about fuel-kind conversion,
we do not think about motor-kind conversion,
and the material status-quo of combustion-motors is "Grauguss",
not aluminium or carbon et cetera !.
When you write about acetylene,search for Prof.Wolfgang Priesemuth-Info,
but you have to accept that all alternative experiments failed in the last
30 years,after first oil-crisis,not only because of less investment in this sector
than in nuke science!
It is possible to shield the surface of the chamber (Nitrogen-engine) ,
but this make the conversion much more expensive !
Sincerely
de Lanca
I want to thank those who have posted replies here. I appreciate the interest.
The use of hydrogen is one fraught with problems and dangers. First and foremost is the extremely explosive nature of the stuff. I wouldn't want to use it near my car or home. It is simply a bad idea. One can put out a match in a pan of gasoline, but all you need is a static spark to set off hydrogen. All one has to do is remember the Hindenburg.....well, enough said.
By the way, I love to discuss the issue of engines and fuels. Perhaps in another subject thread.
However, the issue is energy receivers. Either they work or not. If they do, do they put out enough current to be useful. If they do, how much. In layman's terms.
By the way, I understand horsepower, watts, Fahrenheit and measurements like that.
Some up-to-date info about hydrogen-storage-technology:
http://www.amminex.com
http://www.fuelselltechnologies.com
"Imagine driving from San Francisco to Los Angeles for under $2.00 in fuel costs.
Visualize powering an entire single family home for a year for under $80.00 ..."
(www.marketwire.com;March,2002)
When this will become reality ?
Do not ask me,ask them-it is their prophecy !
Sincerely
? ? ? ? ? ? de Lanca
p.s.: you see."Big",that your negative arguments are a part of the R&D !!!
I am not a pro/con-hydrogen-affiliate,but I invest my power not in
angryness,but in usefull work (hmmm,I think so !)
I think the status quo-with my technical standart-is:
Tate/Don Adsitt/Reichelt Ambient module/cells
Battery
Motor/Generator(DC/AC)
EM-/PM-Transformator(AC/AC)
Sincerely
? ? ? ? ? ? de Lanca
p.s.:Somebody could ask:why not self-running ?
The simple answer: perpetuum mobile are officialy not accepted/denied,
(not to explain about our body-circle-lifespan,sun-planetes-moons-circles),
so it will be easier to accept the common "new invention"-procedere !
Es wird Zeit ein bisschen "die Buechse der Pandora" zu oeffnen:
nehmt einen einfachen-fuer den Modellbau konventionellen-6V/1WMotor/1500rpm DC-Motor
befestigt daran einen Rundmagneten(bonded/sintered Ferrit-unerheblich,falls richtig),
umringt denselben mit einer speziellen "Ausruestung" ,bei Waschmaschinen? als
Drehzahlmesser genutzt(bei uns "Made in Italy"),
und messt Eingang(DC) und Ausgang(AC) !
Ein rotativer Wechselrichter,mit Verstaerker-Funktion !!!
Physikalisch integriert ist die Publikation amasci.com: Simple Generator und
Martin Hauck;DE19741256(Kugelschalengenerator)
Oder eben die Ramon Huth-Version nutzen !
Sincerely
? ? ? ? ? ? ?de Lanca
p.s.:Meine Partner ,unter Anderen,verfuegen ueber circa,kummuliert,150 Jahre work-power-
? ? ?Erfahrung,es sind geophysikalische Anomalien bekannt !
? ? ?Es sind "Electric Repair and Special Coiling Shop"-worker !
? ? ?Dieses nur bezueglich "Messfehler"!?
? ? ?Ich danke fuer jedseitige Kommentare,also from you,Mr. Mannix !
Dieses wird fuer die naechste Zeit mein letztes "post" sein,
good bye and well success !
LancaIV
Thank you for verifying my point. There is indeed no currently available safe method of using hydrogen. I appreciate the affirmation.
On the other hand, were you implying that I was negative and angry? Perhaps that was just an unintended mistake on your part. But please do be careful what you write.
Sorry I don?t read or write any language other than English. I know I speak for others when I point out that I?m not sure the purpose of using another language in a forum based upon English, but it appears to be confusing and inappropriate at the least and serves no positive purpose.
Quote from: lancaIV on January 24, 2006, 05:17:20 PM
US4004210,page7,line 8-10;
I've attached a copy of this patent, as a .pdf file.
Quote from: lancaIV on January 24, 2006, 05:17:20 PM
US562311,page8,line60-67/page11,line 47-54/page15,line 3-6
I believe you meant US5623119.
I've attached a copy of this patent as a .pdf file.
Hello "Big",
in your post the comment about hydrogen,from "The use ..." to "enough said."
is under a "negative sphere" !
We shall see all energy-mediums as future-needs solution,so actual risks shall be
researched and the right "medium-handling" be developped !
It is not the question about weeks,months,years:
the real global -common-challenge will not begin soon 2025 !!!
Sincerely
de Lanca
lancaIV,
You will need to help us all understand what you are trying to say by what you write. I am having trouble making heads or tails of it.
What is a "negative sphere"? Is that a scientific term?
What are "energy mediums"? Surely this is not some sort of spiritualistic funny business.
What does the phrase "as future-needs solution" mean? Is that as opposed to current needs?
What is a "real global-common-challenge"? I can't imagine where to start with that one.
Hey "Big",
a"medium" is to understand as deposit/storage,not self-(re-)activity inside !
Fossil fuels are not energy !
This can be used for the energy-related process,like other -non fossil- material !
So we can recognize,that all gas/liquid/solid material on earth and later outside shall be used as "medium",
"Cement to fuel","Garbage to fuel","Biomass to fuel","Metals to fuel",
"Granite/earth-rock to fuel".
The difference between current/future-needs will be,energy-related:
-90% KWH per capita in the developped countries,through rational using
of all resourches,Fuzzy-logic included !
In reality "ENERGY" consumption is in the industrial/commercial sector something
cheap (consumer price-related) but it is very interestant for speculative actions !
"war for oil"and "dying for oil",why not,if not for oil,the politicians would find an other reason for "games",there is a great reservoir of full-risk-gambler like payed soldier !
Sincerely
de Lanca
But let us come back to the basic theme "energy receiver":
Visit for example the webpage of Mr.Thomas Cosby,
http://www.geocities.com/cosbytech/stock.html
Cosby Technologies Inc.,
a person,involved with thermodynamics since over 40 years !
My first contact with him,telephonical,2001 !
Sincerely
? ? ? ? ? ? de Lanca
Aha, ja rechtsdrehende Kreisprozesse !
diue Konvertieren Umgebungsw?rme in mechanische Energie !
Gut !
Yes, right turning energy cycles which convert latent suroundings heat
into mechanical work, ! Genuine !
This system only needs a thermal difference/voltage of 80 degrees Fahrenheit !
So the combination with a conventional heatpump more heatchanger would
give a thermodynamic-cycle Transformer !
Or,as second possibility,to grave in the absorber in desert sand
-sand is a good heat accumulator- !
Sincerely
de Lanca
First we have to find a circuit, where we can see an amplification
of these kicks.
Let us just calculate:
If we have a power supply with 10 Volts and we pulse
this 10 Volts for 1 microseconds ( 0.000001 seconds)
onto a 100 Ohm resistor, we have spend 0.000001 Wattseconds
of energy from the powersupply.
So if we have a toroidal circuit with 100 Ohm
impedance instead of the resistor and we
can get the output pulse, which is magnified by the kick
rectified and stored in a capacitor, it needs to have a voltage on a e.g.
1 uF cap of at least :
V= (2x Wcap / C)^-1 = 1.41 Volts
to have the same energy as the input pulse !
Now all higher voltages on the 1 uF cap as 1.41 Volts
from a single 10 Volts input pulse 1 usec long will
show then an amplification of this pulse.
So how can we generate such a circuit, that will
have a higher voltage than 1.41 Volts ?
Thanks.
Regards, Stefan.
When I see such a question I think,at first,:
who was for the AC-industry(primarly Westinghouse) more important:
Karl Steinmetz or Nikola Tesla ?
Sincerely
? ? ? ? ? ? de Lanca
p.s.: When the Torribio Bellocq Analogon is real(hydro current~ electro current)
then there will be also the right-experimental repeatable-answer !
Aber nicht mehr heute frueh,keine geistige Konzentration mehr !
Quote from: lancaIV on March 13, 2006, 09:37:37 PM
But let us come back to the basic theme "energy receiver":
Visit for example the webpage of Mr.Thomas Cosby,
http://www.geocities.com/cosbytech/stock.html
Mr. Cosby's website has nothing to do with the 'basic theme "energy receiver"'.
His website has to do with steam engines:
"
The present proposal relates to a method and apparatus for reducing the amount of fuel required to perform work in a steam cycle to generate electricity."
I've attached one of his patents to this message.
Fred is correct. That site has nothing to do with the subject. In fact, it is just another scam site, selling shares and not making a product.
It is amazing how some people can be so gullible. But strange as that may be, they are also the ones who use a lot of mumbo-jumbo, double-talk and just plain ignorance, willing to believe in anything, desiring to be viewed as an expert and knowing little if anything.
First things first; learn to read and write. Next, try some things out for yourself. Gain some experience in life and then start asking questions. Even if you reach that point, you are still not ready to offer knowledge.
Please go back to the original question. If you don?t have an answer or a reasonable comment, please don?t contribute.
Pardon,but also a solar collector is an energy receiver !
A steam-engine is also an energy-receiver and time-parallel? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?an energy-transformer !
Wo beginnt/endet der kleinste "gemeinsame Nenner" bei den Begriffen:
Perpetuum mobile
Overunity
Energy
The Internet is like an OPEN SKY,we have not to buy or sell something,
we can get information through webpages like freeenergynews(A-Z) and
many others,and normally we are souverign enough to decide about
acceptance or recusing !
"Erst sprechen,dann denken !" oder "Erst denken,dann sprechen !"
Sincerely
? ? ? ? ? ? de Lanca
p.s.:
"Big",where can you find a "scam" potential ?
There is a study of +/-500 companies and their R&D :
from 1911 ideas
376 became board-projects
176 became market-introduction
and 11 became financial success,24 invest pay back and the rest:EEE
Imagination:"Just an illusion,..."
No, that simply is not true. A steam engine is not an energy receiver. It is a device that takes out, or utilizes, the energy that has been put into the steam by someone who used another energy source to boil the water. However, the steam engine may be a part of an energy receiver system. This is simple physics, and it is an extremely simple concept.
An energy receiver is an energy tap. It connects with the vast pool of energy that is all around us and allows it to flow freely. I am obviously looking for useful examples of devices that can tap into that pool and allow us to freely use that source without any other step, except perhaps current conversion of some sort. We need free electricity, and plenty of it! I currently use at least 2000 watts continuously, maybe more. I want more electricity and I want it for free. I believe that to be a big issue of our century as we are forced to wean ourselves off of oil and coal.
The solar panel qualifies, but it is not very efficient and it is very expensive. The wind turbine also qualifies, as perhaps do other solar collectors that create steam to run a generator. (The best design I have found is at http://www.stirlingenergy.com//default.asp (http://www.stirlingenergy.com//default.asp) since it is available now, but I suspect that it would be quite expensive.) But if the system is too complex, it will likely be too expensive to purchase and/or maintain. I do not call that practical.
While the Internet is a place where there is a free exchange of information, that is not the purpose here, nor the reason for this topic. I am looking for very specific information in the practical realm. There must be someone out there that has a device for sale, or knowledge of the subject that can be used now.
In the 19.century many great steam-machines/-engines had been
solar heat driven !Parabolic-mirror f.e. as receiver !
It is easy for me to write with orthographical faults,
many posts are written when my Bio-Rhytm "sleeps",
but sometimes it is harder for anybody to argument with facts when
he/she describes "his/her true" !
Please,visit an "Estate library",Wikipedia and other archives,
receive up-to-date knowledge and probably begin with your own
physical experiments-there are also enough e-groups-
and then,but only then let us both discussing about "Earth 2050"
under best or under worst case scene
Sincerely
? ? ? ? ? ? de Lanca
p.s.: 2KW X 8766h(permanent)=? or only because e-heater during cold season? ?
? ? ? ?The average electricity use (not consume)for a 4-Persons-household in FRG:
? ? ? ?4000KWH/year (without room heating)
Obviously this is pointless. There are too few people with real information, and none on this topic. The problem with getting serious feedback is that this industry is full of crackpots that talk a lot but can't deliver anything.