World's first real Free Energy Flashlight - no shaking - no batteries! No Solar

[MileHigh]

That circuit requires a DC power supply of 9 to 10 volts.

[markdansie]

Hi Tinman and everyone.
I thought I might add a little to this conversation from a perspective of usable light. I do have experience in this field having worked with the late Mark E for nearly two years in developing a range led lights using very efficient circuits and LEDS ( efficiency of over 170 Lumens per watt. )
The UN sets a standard for solar powered lights that have to measure at least 25 lux at 80cm (I forget the width of coverage). To achieve this from my experience using the best circuits and LEDS you need at least 50mw. I work at much higher levels of illumination.
I could send dozens of documents with test data but I think for the sake of the argument your really at the bottom of the barrel at this level.
I tend to use at least 200mw in any type of room or desk light however in a flashlight 100mw can produce a decent light.
I have dozens of cells and experiments running as we speak.
This is one of our many products to be launched this year.
I will not get into a debate about harvesting RF and EMF I just wanted to put my experience in regarding what I would call usable light.


https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1993414184/the-hydra-light-pl-500-salt-water-energycell-lante


Kind Regards
Mark

[tinman]

That circuit requires a DC power supply of 9 to 10 volts.

Only if you wish to drive large speakers.
As can be seen and heard in the video,it will work fine without the battery.


Brad

[txt]

I dont know how you keep coming up with 525uW as the charging power value,but it is wrong.

It comes from the first reading of the two multimeters in your video. One shows the voltage of 0.175V and the other one the current of 0.003A. That gives the power of 525μW.

You keep saying that 525 is our charging power,when in fact,it is the power being sent to the LED.

It does not matter where you send it. It is the power your antenna harvests, so either you send it to the LED, and then cannot charge any battery, or you send it to the AA battery, and you will need 8 months to fully charge a single AA cell.

The actual charging power value during the charging cycle is much lower than that.

If the actual charging power is even smaller than those 525μW as you tell, then it will take proportionally longer to charge the battery (it means even longer than those 8 months).

It's just a mater of scaling it up,and making the system more efficient.

If you want to run around with a 1,000 - 100,000 times bigger antenna to power your flashlight, then yes, of course you can scale it up. I am afraid you will need a truck to move around with this single flashlight and its antenna.

To say it cant be done makes you sound like MHs son,and following in his footsteps. The very same kind of thoughts came from those that some time back,laughed at the thought of turning the suns light energy directly into electrical energy.

No idea who is MHs son, but photovoltaics is known since 1849, so I doubt anyone laughed about "turning the suns light energy directly into electrical energy" in the last 175 years, or so. And it is doubtfull than anyone laughed about it before 1849, because normal people did not know much about the electricity anyway.

...but i do say it is possible to charge a torch with 3 AA batteries in it over a 24 hour period using the available EM radiation.

No, it is not possible at this size, as I demonstrated by the calculation and as you confirmed with your video too.

Who care's if it has to sit on a bench,and be plugged into a fixed harvester due to a long antenna wire,the fact remains it could be done

Yes, it could be done if you use an antenna approximately 1,000 times bigger than you did, and stay always as close to the transmitter tower as you are now.

Well it wouldnt be just 70 millilumens if the cap was allowed to charge for a 24 hour period,and we then dissipated that stored energy through an LED in a 3 hour period-now would it.

That's correct, of course. If you charge the cap (or a battery) with 525μW during 24 hours, and let it light only 3 hours, you will get 8 times higher power (24/3 = 8 ). 8 times 525μW gives the power of 4.2mW, and at the LED efficiency of 150lm/W it gives 0.63 lumen. Still not usable for a torch.

Did you grasp my experiment at all?-do you know what i was showing?. Can you really say that it is not possible ?.
Below is the circuit from the video. Put it together,and give it a shot. Then you can tell us all how much charging power it actually has,and then convert that into charge time for the AA batteries

I am afraid that it is you who does not understand what you are doing. The circuit is irrelevant. No electronic circuit can generate energy. So if the input mean power is 525μW, the output mean power is 525μW minus the consumption of the circuit. When you use the input power to put it out in pulses instead of continuous DC power, the immediate output power of the pulse is amplified, but then it is followed by zero output period, so the total energy going out of the circuit will never exceed the input energy. If you do not understand this, it makes no sense to discuss any further. So if your antenna harvests 525μW of continuous power, there is no way you could ever get more than 525μWh of energy on the output within one hour.

[the_big_m_in_ok]

...

If you want to run around with a 1,000 - 100,000 times bigger antenna to power your flashlight, then yes, of course you can scale it up. I am afraid you will need a truck to move around with this single flashlight and its antenna.

...

guys, take a look at this:
http://www.engineersedge.com/copper_wire.htm
       I BELIEVE even if the smallest gauge (40) wire on this list would be several layers on the barrel of the flashlight at, say, 1/2" for the diameter.   It won't weigh much for a 1,000 ft. length, but you'd also need a transformer somewhere in the barrel to step down the voltage to a reasonable level.   And at least one diode and a capacitor to render it to pulsating DC.


I still agree with the nay-sayers.


--Lee