Super Antenna

[onthecuttingedge2005]

I added some charge signs on the diagram

[Magluvin]

Wouldnt a broadband ant pull in a bunch of mixed signals, of which producing a lot of mush?

Unless the receiver it were connected to were able to tune in to viable signals.

If the receiver is wide band, receiving multiple distant signals, the mix is probably not stronger than tuning into 1 good signal producing a consistent oscillation.

I think it would be better to make many different tuned antenna, each with their own tuned receivers. But dont make receivers/ant that are tuned to freq that are not viable. That would depend on the area you might be in geographically.

Pretty much the ant isnt that critical as compared to the tuning of the receiver. Like say CB radio. 40 ch, 1 ant.  But one would usually be only working 1 channel at a time.
So if you have 1 CB ant and 40 tuned receivers. Would the receivers produce more output with each having their own ant(even of the same type) than drawing off of 1 ant?

Just some of my thoughts. 

Mags

[onthecuttingedge2005]

Wouldnt a broadband ant pull in a bunch of mixed signals, of which producing a lot of mush?

Unless the receiver it were connected to were able to tune in to viable signals.

If the receiver is wide band, receiving multiple distant signals, the mix is probably not stronger than tuning into 1 good signal producing a consistent oscillation.

I think it would be better to make many different tuned antenna, each with their own tuned receivers. But dont make receivers/ant that are tuned to freq that are not viable. That would depend on the area you might be in geographically.

Pretty much the ant isnt that critical as compared to the tuning of the receiver. Like say CB radio. 40 ch, 1 ant.  But one would usually be only working 1 channel at a time.
So if you have 1 CB ant and 40 tuned receivers. Would the receivers produce more output with each having their own ant(even of the same type) than drawing off of 1 ant?

Just some of my thoughts. 

Mags

I think that conrad was looking for an antenna that picked up all radio noise at the same time and in an omni-directional receiver antenna. and you are also right, CETI antenna did it all the time listening in on thousands of channels at the same time. but he just wants to convert the good signals and junk signals into electrical energy.

Jerry

[conradelektro]

I think that conrad was looking for an antenna that picked up all radio noise at the same time and in an omni-directional receiver antenna. and you are also right, CETI antenna did it all the time listening in on thousands of channels at the same time. but he just wants to convert the good signals and junk signals into electrical energy.

Jerry

@Jerry (onthecuttingedge2005): Yes, exactly! Why is it so difficult to understand for radio specialists?

@Radio and Antenna Specialists:

Just consider all electromagnetic waves in the air. In sum all electromagnetic waves have a certain energy content (of course the energy, even all electromagnetic waves summed up, is rather small). And now one can try to harvest this total energy content (some call it ambient energy).

The most simple idea is to rectify all electromagnet waves by help of a diode rectifier. Just one diode, because a full wave rectifier has a higher Voltage threshold.

See the drawing for the most simple circuit which depends on the "gain" of the antenna. The antenna should have a "high gain" in all frequencies (ideally from 45 Hz to 1000 GHz) and in all directions. And the diode should be a HF Diode also for all frequencies.

Of course one will not be able to build the "ideal electromagnetic wave catcher", but may be 60 MHz to 10 GHz is possible?

Most electromagnetic waves in the air are between 60 MHz and 10 GHz (FM Radio, TV, cell phones, WLANs), radar would be higher towards 1000 GHz, and the hum from the AC mains would be 45 Hz or 50 Hz. So, may be three antennas? The AM radio stations are shutting down and short wave radio and long wave radio are on the decline as well.

Application: a super cap is slowly charged to a certain Voltage (e.g. 2 Volt) over a day or a week (by the "ambient energy receiver") and then one can use the super cap as a battery for a clock or a cell phone or a flash light. Well, not very exciting, but why not?

May be it is not possible to build an "universal omnidirectional antenna". If this is the case, I want to know from the specialists why it should not be possible.

The best antenna should be a very high (hundreds of meters) vertical wire. This poses practical problems (expensive tower, lightning strikes, building codes). So, the question boils down to: "is there something else than a long vertical wire?"

Greetings, Conrad

P.S.: I know, what I write is trivial, but I want to get the idea across to radio and antenna specialists who always want to select a frequency or at least a frequency band. They also want to "direct" the antenna towards the transmitter and they want to do "something" with the received frequency. Just consider the "content" of all transmissions in the air as "energy" and not as "information". And one does not know which transmitter will be received, one wants to receive all transmitters there are around a certain place on earth (may be in a radius of 1000 miles, also from satellits).

[wings]

The Article describes some experimenters that prove the mysterious current from the Broom Antenna 


http://www.antentop.org/