My entrance into the $1M Randi challenge

[spinner]

A few minutes ago I just sent the following email to the Randi organization. I have been using my Google email account to send such emails to challenge@randi.org

You heard many opinions of the different people about engaging in The Randy Challenge.... But It's up to you to decide.
If I were you and If I would be convinced that I have a revolutionary technology worth billions..., I'd never "sold it" to an "orthodox skeptical organisation" for "just" a million...
Check out the legals of the Randy org.

Will this be the first legitimate Perpetual Motion machine that Randi denies in his challenge? That's not right. If he knows my diode array has a high chance of succeeding, and he does not want to lose his one million dollars, then that's very shady. 

"Your" diode array is not a novelty at all... Why don't you understand that??? Similar claims are periodical stuff, quite often since the late 50's ... Or, since the dawn of semiconductor technology...
Perpetual motion? I think I was just one of the people who told you (agreed with you?) that your device (if working in accordance with your claim), would be a 2nd Law breaker (at the very beginning).... Using an ambient thermal energy without a necessary drain / (potential difference)....
Remember the Maxwellian Daemon? This should be a cartoon version of what your claim really is....

I'm at the "FE scene" for a decade or so, and I remember that there were many similar claims being made just in the last few years...
Long before this OU site, there were already a great discussions about this subject... (I can tell you, an expensive business at the time of the analog modems and "BBS's").... And, nothing of value came from those claims so far...? Probably because of the suppresion?  Or, maybe, because the thing is not working as it is supposed to?

I think The "Randy.org" dealed with a few similar claims in the past... Just as an "application", of course.
Most of the challengers dropped out of the next step - "full test" very soon after the challenge was "officially" presented....
After all, a classical thermodynamics is a very well understood (and thoroughly verified) subject....

The other day I came across this thread at the Randi forum -->
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=1935624&postcount=16

As you can see, the web page title for the above thread at the Randi forum is "Diode Array challenge to the Second Law of Thermodynamics."  Charles M. Brown started a few threads about diode arrays at the Randi forum. Obviously Charles did not enter a diode array into the challenge, and he was made fun it. It appears Randi's followers believe the diode array should be entered into the challenge, thus making fun of Charles M. Brown in the above link. Well, I am not Charles M. Brown, but I have a diode array, and here I am Randall James Hamilton Zwinge. Are you going to deny a Perpetual Motion Machine claim?

PL

Yes, I am just one of the people who can easily object your claims. In fact, after a few posts where I presented some objections (you did dismissed most of them without answering), I am sure you're a nice & good pearson , intriguing, capable, an enthusiast...,  but also quite "delusional".... Your "math" presented is just a "one way thicket".... The stuff which suits your reasoning is good... The rest - simply dismiss it...


THERE IS NO A THERMAL (Johnson/Nyqiust) FE ENERGY!
Well, there actually is, but it's not "available" in the way your "diode array" is supposed to work....

I'm sure you'll do the best to oppose this opinion...

Needless to say, you'll need a lot more than a few "microVolts and a few picoAmperes on the multi kiloOhm load" to convince the world or even this community.....

...
Well, I am not Charles M. Brown, but I have a diode array, and here I am Randall James Hamilton Zwinge. Are you going to deny a Perpetual Motion Machine claim?

Well, if I were You, I'd definitely try to form an "Alliance".  C.B. would be my nr.1 choice....
Cheers!

[PaulLowrance]

You heard many opinions of the different people about engaging in The Randy Challenge.... But It's up to you to decide.
If I were you and If I would be convinced that I have a revolutionary technology worth billions..., I'd never "sold it" to an "orthodox skeptical organisation" for "just" a million... Check out the legals of the Randy org.

Are you saying Randi would somehow own the diode array rights?

"Your" diode array is not a novelty at all... Why don't you understand that??? Similar claims are periodical stuff, quite often since the late 50's ... Or, since the dawn of semiconductor technology...

I have discussed that ages ago at other forums.  The work done in the 50's was theoretical, and consisted of no real experiments that would have shown any positive results. There are two people in history that have built diode arrays that according to the mathematics would provide a detectable DC voltage. The other day I finally convinced Tom that his 1N34A diode array measurements were conclusive in that the diode produced a DC voltage. As I have told Tom, since his diode array is appreciable large, his next step would have been to test his diode array in rural areas. Charles M. Brown also claims his 1993 diode array produced a DC voltage.

I have made it clear that my diode array is the first in history that has proven to produce DC power across a load while taking into consideration the precautions. It includes the exact part #'s and instructions to build the diode array, first stage electrometer, the fiber optics cable that goes to a photodiode and second stage voltage amplifier circuit. That is indeed unique, as you cannot find any such designs that shows every detail where anyone at this very moment can replicate this perpetual motion machine that will produce positive results, a DC voltage across the load.

I'm at the "FE scene" for a decade or so, and I remember that there were many similar claims being made just in the last few years...
Long before this OU site, there were already a great discussions about this subject... (I can tell you, an expensive business at the time of the analog modems and "BBS's").... And, nothing of value came from those claims so far...? Probably because of the suppresion?  Or, maybe, because the thing is not working as it is supposed to?

You lack detail.  Charles M. Brown, Tom Schum, and myself are the only people with diode arrays.

I think The "Randy.org" dealed with a few similar claims in the past... Just as an "application", of course.
Most of the challengers dropped out of the next step - "full test" very soon after the challenge was "officially" presented....
After all, a classical thermodynamics is a very well understood (and thoroughly verified) subject....

It is a macro system of averages that has a known error rate at smaller scales, period. See my website for details.

Yes, I am just one of the people who can easily object your claims. In fact, after a few posts where I presented some objections (you did dismissed most of them without answering), I am sure you're a nice & good pearson , intriguing, capable, an enthusiast...,  but also quite "delusional".... Your "math" presented is just a "one way thicket".... The stuff which suits your reasoning is good... The rest - simply dismiss it...

If you think my math is flawed then by all means stop waving your hands and show the errors along with the correct math. Lets see your math that shows diodes produce 0 (zero) DC volts from thermal noise. You cannot because the best conventional semicondutor mathematics, which is based on quantum physics, clearly shows that diodes must rectify ambient thermal noise. I'll be waiting for your math, but I won't hold my breath. I'll give you four days, until which I'll have to declare you as delusional.  So far you are hand waving. A bunch of claims that even a three year old could make.

THERE IS NO A THERMAL (Johnson/Nyqiust) FE ENERGY!
Well, there actually is, but it's not "available" in the way your "diode array" is supposed to work....

Hand waving. Bunch of baseless non-mathematical claims. Show your math. I've shown my math at my website.

I'm sure you'll do the best to oppose this opinion...

My best?  I don't need to, since I am a scientist, and scientists are interested in mathematics and/or real experiments. Not ambiguous yackity yack claims from people such as yourself.

Needless to say, you'll need a lot more than a few "microVolts and a few picoAmperes on the multi kiloOhm load" to convince the world or even this community.....

Why don't you let real scientists make their own decisions. You know ... people who know how to easily measure 20uV DC.



PL

[wizardofmars]

Obviously Charles did not enter a diode array into the challenge, and he was made fun it.

I think that thread was overall pretty respectable - people took one or two skeptical jabs to start but it got worse as Charles Brown was evasive and vague. He didn't have any answers and couldn't identify 'Forrest Laboratories' the alleged tester under which he received positive results in 1993. So the test didn't rule out RF, thermal or terahertz radiation effects per the thread. The guy sounds a bit delusional frankly.

I wonder if this stuff is patentable with so much prior art. Brown aka http://www.diodearray.com/ has a 1973 patent (expired) and there is also the "Nova Institute" thermo electric chips described at  http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:NOVA_Thermal_Electric_Chips.

Paul, have you had your results verified by a laboratory?

[PaulLowrance]

I think that thread was overall pretty respectable

You left out the link. I don't think the following is respectable at all -->
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=1935624&postcount=16

and there is also the "Nova Institute" thermo electric chips described at  http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:NOVA_Thermal_Electric_Chips.

The nova chip is different, as it converts low heat to electricity. Diode arrays don't require a macro scale temperature gradient except for microscopic temperature gradients that are impossible to get rid of at room temperatures.

Paul, have you had your results verified by a laboratory?

What exactly would you consider a lab?  I have a lab in the house.


PL

[wizardofmars]

You left out the link. I don't think the following is respectable at all -->
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=1935624&postcount=16

You must be pretty thin-skinned then.

What exactly would you consider a lab?  I have a lab in the house.

Independent, with a couple of Phd's on staff.