top

Isothermal Thermionic Converters

Post new topic Reply to topic FizzX.org Forum Index | Physics Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9   Page 9 of 9

Tue May 05, 2009 12:20 pm PostPost subject:
Hardcastle
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


Joined: 24 Apr 2009
Posts: 119
Location: Australia

Reply with quote

ddddddd
_________________
Just because something is accepted, it does not necessarily mean that it is right. Think for yourself.


Last edited by Hardcastle on Tue May 26, 2009 9:11 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
 
Tue May 05, 2009 12:23 pm PostPost subject:
Hardcastle
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


Joined: 24 Apr 2009
Posts: 119
Location: Australia

Reply with quote

ddddddd
_________________
Just because something is accepted, it does not necessarily mean that it is right. Think for yourself.


Last edited by Hardcastle on Tue May 26, 2009 9:11 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
 
Tue May 05, 2009 2:20 pm PostPost subject:
Trim
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


Joined: 07 Oct 2007
Posts: 217
Location: Colchester, Essex

Reply with quote


@Phil
I feel for you but I can also understand them, there is so much peer or should I say gang pressure to support a particular view and as most of the 'so called experts' are behind them it takes real courage to disagree. Knowing that I think you should be a bit more cautious with the Curlitron (new name) and merely claim its for an experiment to cool cpu's or more efficient solar power both are true of course but not the whole truth that might stop potential builders thinking you are a 'woowoo' Good luck in China.

Regards Alan

_________________
Assume all assumptions are wrong.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Wed May 06, 2009 12:04 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

>>"They distance themselves from me politely"

Follow the money.

Phd's have lost their jobs because they used the term 'Intellegent Design' in their publications. And in this case, it is not because of beliefs, NIH, 2LOT or the like. It is the result of University funding. Those with money dictate what they will fund and what they won't. Now, why do they prohibit certain areas of research? Wink

It becomes a matter of global economics and security. We are progressing toward a global society that has fully extricated itself from religion and postitioned itself to delcare global peace and security on that foundation. This means that any philosopy or claim that is related to "unknown forces", "unexplainable phenomenon", supernatural, hocus pocus or even God himself will be disregarded and set aside. Therefore the emerging global society will only accept solid proof of any claims and will no longer delve deeply into unknown areas that may disrupt the economy or security in any way. Even though 2LOT has already been circumvented by some it is quickly dismissed as unique or nonstandard and of little import to the 'Normal World' in which we live. I for one think our world is far from 'Normal'.

Pass Go, Collect 2 cents. Mr. Green

I think you have something there Phil, it just needs to be fine tuned. A prototype perhaps? I think we could take a small TV CRT, remove the guns and replace them with some Ag-O-Cs, elevate the Anode voltage and measure the energy exchange. Put the device in a closed box, measure the light produced from the phosphor and the thermal reduction of the ambient air. Naturally we would need a good thermal contact between the material and the outside air, but thats pretty easy. It would give a proof of concept as well as a solid demonstration that the emitted particles could be curved by the yoke field. Just a quick and dirty proto, but it may open some doors.

Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Wed May 06, 2009 12:21 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

Well, it appears the prototype and experimentation is already done:

http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0311/0311104.pdf

Their results shows an electron velocity of 117 km / sec (or 117 km sec ^-1)

I wonder why they are not persuing a production related endeavor...oh wait, I answered that in the last post - nm.

Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Wed May 06, 2009 12:44 am PostPost subject:
Trim
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


Joined: 07 Oct 2007
Posts: 217
Location: Colchester, Essex

Reply with quote

Thanks for your post Harvey but Phil has already posted Fu's PDF either in this forum or Steorns.
I think if you can accept an electric current as a movement of ions irrespective of whether they do any useful work or not, then electrons emitted by a cathode even if they fall back or just create a charge space is in my opinion an electric current and as ambient heat can cause emission in a vacuum ambient heat must be driving a current however useless it is.
_________________
Assume all assumptions are wrong.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Wed May 06, 2009 10:18 pm PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

I contacted Xinyong Fu Yesterday and he kindly responded today. I asked how his progress was going since 2003 and told him I may have application for it when it is ready. Here is is response:

Xin Yong Fu wrote:

Dear Mr. (my last name),

Thanks for your kind letter.

About our experiment work, yes, we uploaded our first experiment report on Archive/Physics in 2003. The index number of the paper is archive/physics 0311104.

We have improved the experiment by using some new detecting instruments after 2003, especially in 2007.

We are now making new electronic tubes again, hoping to derive some tubes of much better quality. We think we are progressing well in this job. There are difficulties, but the situation is inspiring.

So far, financially, we rely on oueselves. No institute in Chiina or abroad is interested to support us formally. But we think this is not a serious problem. We are marching froward well, step by step. Every step is an enjoyment.

We focus our efforts now to get greater output current and greater output power. It seems likely that generations of scientists and engineers to come will have a long way to go to apply our original idea and our primary test result to practical applications. Anyway, from Maxwell to Fu, more than one hundred years have passed already.

Best regards,

Xinyong Fu


It is encouraging to see that the research and development phase of this theoretical model is progressing. I look foward to Phil's Solid state version as well.

Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Thu May 07, 2009 12:15 am PostPost subject:
Trim
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


Joined: 07 Oct 2007
Posts: 217
Location: Colchester, Essex

Reply with quote

Thanks very much for the update Mr Wallbanger Wink

I hope Phil's visit to China goes well I wonder if he will meet with the professor?
_________________
Assume all assumptions are wrong.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Thu May 07, 2009 8:41 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

Like Mr. Fu stated:

"It seems likely that generations of scientists and engineers to come will have a long way to go to apply our original idea and our primary test result to practical applications."

It may be a while before we can start applying the technology to workable solutions. I have one particular project waiting for the technology.

Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Thu May 07, 2009 10:16 am PostPost subject:
Trim
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


Joined: 07 Oct 2007
Posts: 217
Location: Colchester, Essex

Reply with quote

It sure is a catch 22 the only way to prove it is to build it, and unless it is proved its very hard to find a builder, to repeat I hope things go well in China and Phil finds a builder that can produce it successfully. Although I wish Phil wasn't so 'new age' about it because I don't think showing a small box that maybe lights up a LED will cause newspapers and television to come knocking at his door. It would be a shame if after taking so much time and trouble to get a Curlitron built it was still ignored. I think he should sell limited rights say to his idea of a CPU cooler that produces electricity or to a helicopter making for a 'fuel less' helicopter. Then he would get all the publicity he wants.
_________________
Assume all assumptions are wrong.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Thu May 07, 2009 8:13 pm PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

I seriously doubt that any real publicity will ensue even when usable power is fully demonstrated because of NIH and 2LOT. John Hutchison took his casimir crystals overseas because neither Canada nor the US thought he had a credible technology. Unfortunately his versions do not amp up as expected. They work fine for lighting LED's for 20 years, but don't try and parallel them into battery banks. That tells me that the energy is phase dependent and that each crystal made has its own signature and that the energy can easily tunnel back through conventional diodes. His work has not made any mainstream publicity except a couple of science shows on cable and part of a video series.

Look at Solar energy. Even after flipping a switch and demonstrating the electric meter running backwards we still don't have a mad rush to utilization.

I project a minimum 5 years before this technology could become feasible for public assimiliaton. To accelerate it any faster would require abnormal circumstances and intervention. But even then, it is a good road to go down as it will open up greater opportunities over time. I do not see a dead end on the road to cold cathode emmision technology. And with the threat of global warming, any device that converts heat to electricy is ok in my book.

Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Thu May 07, 2009 11:57 pm PostPost subject:
Trim
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


Joined: 07 Oct 2007
Posts: 217
Location: Colchester, Essex

Reply with quote

So it is in mine. I made a mistake in Phil's whereabouts he is not in China but in Canberra to see the Minister of science lets hope he can get government backing, as that will really push Curlitronic technology along.
_________________
Assume all assumptions are wrong.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Fri May 08, 2009 11:03 pm PostPost subject:
Trim
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


Joined: 07 Oct 2007
Posts: 217
Location: Colchester, Essex

Reply with quote

Phillip Cyril Smith no less posted this on Steorn I hope you can have a fruitful discussion with him.

http://www.steorn.com/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=61575&page=8#Item_33

Regards Alan
_________________
Assume all assumptions are wrong.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Sat May 09, 2009 1:39 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

http://www.steorn.com/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=61575&page=8#Item_25

Guess it all depends on the whispers Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Wed May 20, 2009 2:04 am PostPost subject:
maryyugo
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


Joined: 13 Jul 2007
Posts: 114

Reply with quote

Harvey, you silly wabbit,

Solar energy is clumsy, occupies huge amounts of space and is extremely expensive and unwieldy for home use. That's why it isn't more widely adopted. Also, in case you didn't notice, it doesn't work very well when it's cloudy and not at all at night.

Casimir crystals light LED's for 20 years? Nice. Where do I buy one? Where has one been demonstrated? Where are the scientific papers and prices?

The reason technologies are not adapted is usually because they don't work! Or, as in the case of solar, because they don't work well enough!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Wed May 20, 2009 9:56 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

Hi Mary,

Good to hear from you. How's your PIFU? Well I hope. Silly TK thought they had transparent retinas LOL, I had to explain to him that they operate on an entirely different spectrum and are only transparent to our visible light spectrum.

As regards Solar Panels, a typical good quality panel 1 foot by 3 feet will offer 90W. Therefore a 3 x 3 grid is about 270W. A typical house will consume about 3KW peak. Large houses consume more, smaller houses less. So how much area to we need? 100 square feet. Or a 10 x 10. The average garage is 300% larger than that at 20 x 20. So area is not an issue.

The price varies by type and quality. Cheap 15 or 30 watt panels can be found at places like Harbor freight for about $100 each with a charging system and some low voltage fluorescent lights that can be run directly off the panels. Solar Roofing shingles that offer 1' x 8' run considerably more. So there is no doubt that Solar energy is expensive, but it does eventually pay for itself while reducing the carbon footprint of supplied energy. The payoff is about 5 years on the average and new technolgy hopes to bring that down to 2 years.

A small solar project I setup surprised us all in how well it worked even on cloudy days. The charge rate was slower as the amperage was reduced, but the voltage was surprisingly adequate. One of the things to consider regarding day and night is that solar tubes (that just pass sunlight to the rooms) can be installed for lighting during the day while batteries are charged off of the panels and then at night the batteries can be used to light the house. This simple arrangement can reduce energy use by the full amount spent on lighting and drop electric bills into lower tiers saving on both the money spent and the need for gas generators to be running. The technology is here, it works and many people are smart enough to put it in to use. But the demand is small because of the bad press.

Your comment simply repeats the bad press that is already out there even though the points are not very solid.

Casimir Cells? Well, according to this report, they were demonstrated a conference in Japan. Here is a video explaining the cells. My research led me to some conversations with John where he recommened experimenting with Rochelle Salts and Fractured Agate. I never followed through with any experiements myself. But if you want one, I can see what I can do. The cost per unit is extremely high as currently only prototypes exist, but if your interested I can probably get a price and availability. Why would you care about scientific papers? - anyone who has a PIFU knows science is 'fool of wholes' Mr. Green

Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Thu Jul 02, 2009 1:01 pm PostPost subject:
Trim
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


Joined: 07 Oct 2007
Posts: 217
Location: Colchester, Essex

Reply with quote

Good news the CURLiTRON may be able to be fabricated after all. Thoriated tungsten may be the new low work function cathode although it needs a 900k temperature to be effective, great for solar power and maybe even 200 miles to the gallon. Very Happy
_________________
Assume all assumptions are wrong.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Thu Jul 02, 2009 4:41 pm PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

Hmmm. Neutral
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Tue Oct 20, 2009 9:17 am PostPost subject:
Trim
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


Joined: 07 Oct 2007
Posts: 217
Location: Colchester, Essex

Reply with quote

The first working CURLiTRON device that is planned for May in Australia is going to in a solar energy producer which is planned to produce 810 watts per square metre. This will be 80% efficient with most of the loses coming from the Fresnel lens. more info is planned for next week after certain legal technicalities are dealt with.
_________________
Assume all assumptions are wrong.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Sat Nov 28, 2009 3:56 am PostPost subject:
kt4ye
Newbie


Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Posts: 1
Location: Charlotte, NC

Reply with quote

One of the most fascinating aspects of the Curlitron is that its function is based on Temperature, and not *Temperature Difference.* Most all other energy extraction devices depend on a temperature difference.

Of course, that sets up a whole new set of issues. The velocity of the electrons popping off the "cathode" is a function of Temperature. And if the velocity is too high, the electrons can end up "curling" into something other than what you want them to. And THAT implies that the system needs some kind of feedback mechanism if the Temperature is not stable OR it means that the Curlitron can only operate in locations where the temperature is always constant.

Not insurmountable. Just not easy.
_________________
Things Are More Like They are Now Than They Ever Have Been
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Sat Nov 28, 2009 2:07 pm PostPost subject:
Trim
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


Joined: 07 Oct 2007
Posts: 217
Location: Colchester, Essex

Reply with quote

Are any objects ever at exactly the same temperature, exactly? The original Curlitron was designed allowing for the fact that electrons would be emitted at different energies and angles, with both magnetic and electrostatic fields helping to guide them in the desired direction. Some would fall back first, maybe for another try, others might go off exploring the 'Meta-verse' but most at a high enough temperature would end up on the other cathode (slightly heating that and cooling the one it left) then the electrons would complete there destiny by driving a load. In the latest version of the Curlitron (which is planned to be tested in February) 'the Curlitron Converter' the angles of the cathodes are no longer right angles and look a bit like a circular saw-blade, this is designed to turn heat directly into rotation via an electrostatic motor.
_________________
Assume all assumptions are wrong.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Post new topic Reply to topic FizzX.org Forum Index | Physics
View previous topic
View next topic
Display posts from previous:   




You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum