Selfrunning Free Energy devices up to 5 KW from Tariel Kapanadze

[Farmhand]

A solar panel is a very inefficient energy conversion device, so by strict definition cannot be overunity. However, if it powers a device without any other source of non-environmental energy input such as from the grid or battery, as the sun's energy is not paid for by the user, the system is said to be running at COP infinity, although it is still way under unity. If the measured electrical output energy from the solar panel could in some way be amplified in a device, such that its output energy was more than the total system input energy, then the system would be running over unity. A COP infinity system is therefore not over unity.

Yes but how is the efficiency of a solar panel measured ?

What is the efficiency of the conversion of the light of the wavelength the panel is designed to harness?
I mean I don't think they are designed to harness the total bandwidth of the light that hit's them.
Do they only utilize 20% or so of the light of the wavelengths they are designed to use, from what hits the panel ?
Or is it 20 % of the total light energy that hit's the panel ?

Cheers

[leo48]

Do they only utilize 20% or so of the light of the wavelengths they are designed to use, from what hits the panel ?
Or is it 20 % of the total light energy that hit's the panel ?

Solar panels efficiency ie the electrical output divided by the total incident energy from
the sun that can reach 1000 to 1200 watts per square meter depending on the latitude,
it could be 12% for monocrystalline and 15% for polycrystalline, it is clear that it is still
free energy except purchase costs and maintenance ..

Leo48

[Hoppy]

Solar panels efficiency ie the electrical output divided by the total incident energy from
the sun that can reach 1000 to 1200 watts per square meter depending on the latitude,
it could be 12% for monocrystalline and 15% for polycrystalline, it is clear that it is still
free energy except purchase costs and maintenance ..

Leo48

Free energy- yes but overunity- no. The term 'free energy' can reasonably be applied to any energy that can be collected by a system without the user having to pay for it directly. However, the energy collected by solar and wind devices is not strictly free as leo48 points out because of purchase and maintenance costs. As I see it, the main problem here is with definitions in that that some people incorrectly argue that a system running on free energy = overunity, simply because it is doing work that requires no input of conventional grid derived energy by the user.

[Farmhand]

Solar panels efficiency ie the electrical output divided by the total incident energy from
the sun that can reach 1000 to 1200 watts per square meter depending on the latitude,
it could be 12% for monocrystalline and 15% for polycrystalline, it is clear that it is still
free energy except purchase costs and maintenance ..

Leo48

Yes as I thought, so to say a solar panel is say 20 % efficient or so, more like 15 but we'll just say 20 %.
Is like saying a bucket with a sieve in the bottom sized for catching 10 mm marbles is inefficient because it can't catch
marbles less than 10 mm diameter. If 100 marbles (10mm or smaller) were dropped into it and only 20 were 10 mm marbles it would only catch 20
out of 100 hundred marbles but it would be 100 % efficient at catching 10 mm marbles, it would be 20 % efficient at catching
all marbles 10 mm and under.

All the light wavelengths a solar panel cannot utilize should be left out of the efficiency calculation, then we could see how efficient
a solar panel is at utilizing the wavelengths it can utilize.

The efficiency is based on the parameters applied to the calculation and only that.

Are solar panels designed to be able to capture the full spectrum of light energy ?
If not their efficiency should not be based on light that it cannot utilize in any way.
The panel efficiency should be related to it's ability to make an output from the light it can utilize
considering the losses involved in the harnessing and outputting of that energy.

Would a motor coil that is designed to take advantage of low frequency AC be considered inefficient if
it was given high frequency AC to run on of which it could make no use ?

Another example, a ocean wave machine has a travel of 2 meters up and down but is utilizing energy from
3 meter waves, the energy in the extra meter of wave is not counted in the efficiency of the machine because it has no access to it.

Cheers

[jbignes5]

 How about we get back to the task at hand instead of arguing over what OU is or even what free energy is. If the system outputs more energy then you have to use to get it ruining then who cares if it is OU or free energy.


After researching more on the subject I have found a good patent to get the gist of a valid method to extract energy from a system, weather it be an open system or any other system.


http://www.teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla-patents-685,953-intensifying-transmitted-effects

From what I am getting from this is that you can intensify any signal into a usable power by this method. What I have read is a step forward in getting any of these systems to work as long as there is a weak signal to use.
The method is to take a high frequency signal and accumulate it in a high dielectric condenser and output it after it has a chance to gain in voltage. So lets say you have a 1 MHz signal you would let it accumulate until it's voltage is sufficient to power the load from the capacitor and not the signal directly. This is done via two antenna and stored in a high value capacitor then discharged into the load or as Tesla put it receiver. If that receiver was a transformer with a bifilar secondary then we should see plenty of power.

In this system it doesn't matter where the signal comes from and how weak it is from what tesla talks about in the patent. It could be from a signal we provide or even from a natural source. It also doesn't matter what kind of energy it is. Well it does but it only matters to the translator we use. If it is an AC signal, AC impulse or even a uni pulse. The basic system is the same just the connects have to be different.

It seems to me that what determines the current is actually a conversion of frequency and the size of the capacitor. The frequency lowering effect lets the capacitors charge to a higher value and then discharge with force into the receiver. What that receiver is, has to be researched. But I suggest two things must be improved. The capacitors need an upgrade. Maybe using the graphene form with a good oil dielectric would help and the cylendar he uses could be changed to transistors, tubes or even spark gap. The change of frequency needs to be 60 cycles for our devices so that should be very easy to do. It seems the capacity is the resultant power in this converter. 1 million impulses going into 60 should let that capacitor bank get a huge charge then discharge into a transformer to convert the impulses to an AC form.

Maybe this is what TK is doing. He provides the signal via transistor and lets it build up in a capacitor via an inductive pickup. Then he discharges that capacitor via another transistor into a loading transformer and rectifies it for the inverter to self power the device and power a load from the same pre-inverter connection. The inverter might not be needed but for the input signal it makes it easier in the beginning.