quentron.com

[Bruce_TPU]

I have asked to be made moderator of this thread Sarkey.  And if so.... well, let's just say for your posting nonsense..... (End; Delete)

Have a wonderful night,

Bruce

[forcefield]

From:

http://www.theimagingsource.biz/en/technology/ambientheatelectricity/

QUOTE:

The Imaging Source Technologies
Ambient Heat To Electricity Conversion ...

Based on their website, this looks like something that actually works.  It appears that it might be very sensitive to temperature. ("The working point of the micro-structure area was designed for an ambient temperature of 20°C/68°F.")  It might also be cost prohibitive. ("Both areas are made of gold.")  But it looks very encouraging!

What I find interesting is that no claims have been made that there has been a $10 experiment that did not produce almost a Volt. Assume that this one claim is true and we have an issue as to explain how you get one volt from the Tube experiment. Why not deal with this?

If an alternative explanation is viewed more likely than it being an effect violating the second law, then it would be on Hardcastle to prove otherwise, but if we fail to find a sound explanation of a Volt we should seek to replicate, is that not a fair approach?

I say that a Volt is an amazing output because it exceeds what I know to be possible with thermocouples, it might be explained by the use of special thermoelectric materials but these are not present in common pentode tubes.

Anyone here have an idea? other than saying it was a measurement error, he must have checked all he could by now to still maintain he and others have found the same results.

I too am somewhat impressed with 1 volt, but the power level is very low.  I got the impression that a steady state condition was never met - with the glass envelope on the verge of implosion just before the device begins outputting.  One thought that I have is that some sort of chemical reaction is going on.  Also, was it tested with electrical power removed from the oven?  I'd feel a whole lot more comfortable with believing that something exceptional was happening if the power level was measured to be watts, or at least tenths of watts.

And, the RF suppression capacitor makes me very uneasy.  This experiment should be done in a shielded environment.  If there's enough RF energy around to worry about adding a capacitor, then there's probably enough RF around for a hot tube to rectify it!

[doublehelix]

To say it is RF is to say the guy is so dumb that he (and others presumably around him) would spend years and piles of money without checking the basics, I can't see that.

I saw someone a while ago say it was radioactive and I saw somewhere a statement that this is could not produce more than a pA, perhaps someone here can do the calculation but you would have to think that if Tubes were made with radioactive materials they would carry a warning and that the effect would be known by a million radio age engineers.

Since he has stated the Tube type it seems also hard to imagine that a Tube designed to operate on signals could be a super high temperature battery converting some chemicals to power, again wouldn't that be common knowledge?

I think the areas to question might be photoelectric but you would think any experiment done at 500C is not going to be subject to much stray light, if any. If it were PV then surely this would be obvious.

I say I am at a loss to explain a Volt and a uA from some conventional source unless Hardcastle and his associates are so silly not to ask the same questions as we can. We surely must assume if it has been replicated as claimed that obvious checks would be done.

For the sake of an investigative debate rather than a speculation of incompetence let's assume it is not bad measurement, RF, PV, chemical or radioactive, what is left?

From Arthur Conan Doyle Sr...........When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.

So ask ourselves this

Could they (many replicators) be so silly as to not eliminate the RF interfernce isse? I say No
Could they all design and experiment where the temperature across the device was say 100C? I say No
Could the device be radioactive to produce such an output? Well if it was it would amaze me that it would not have been obvious to a million radio engineers 50 years ago, so I say No.
Chemical? again is Tubes were chemical batteries everyone would have known 50 years ago, so again I say No.

What else?

PV? I think this is not possible unless you deliberately designed the device such, and as I understand Tubes the cathode is in the center and so not visible therefore not likely to be struck by light. Again if a tube was photosensitive it would surely have been a noted issue when used as an amplifier.

I cannot think of anything else.

[doublehelix]

Just thought of one more, vibration!

Some tubes became microphonic, not sure why but I am guessing if the internal parts became loose.

I like this idea but I do not know that it could produce what is reported, but maybe it can.

[Bruce_TPU]

You know, I have come across, some years ago a company that had designed a type of mini battery that allowed ambient temperature difference to produce enough electricity to keep this micro battery charged.  I can't find my notes on them right now, but I did run across this very interesting patent and information.  I believe it functions in similar fashion as Phillip's nano design.  Using electron tunneling, in this case, via a huge number of micro diodes.  Very interesting, from Peswiki.  Oh, and P.S.  Sarkey has been moderated.  Thank you Stephan.

http://www.peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Charles_M._Brown%27s_Thermal_Electric_Chip

Cheers,

Bruce