Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
> Couple quick comments/questions...
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > This email will describe the simplest (as far as I know) method of
> > capturing and storing ambient temperature energy. Hopefully those
> > wanting to reply could first read the entire email since I'll
> > address various possible questions later in this email.
> >
> > I was hoping at least someone would have answered my previously
> > posted question to nail down their stance if they believe it's
> > possible to capture and store energy taken from ambient
> > temperature. Since nobody posted his or her stance I'll just go
> > ahead and post the proof. This could be a fun ride, as debating
> > experience shows most people won't be nailed, which allows them to
> > weasel out of any situation, which is probably one reason there are
> > so many formulations of the 2nd law. There's a well-taken 2nd law
> > quote in the physics community by physicist P.W. Bridgman, "There
> > are almost as many formulations of the second law as there have been
> > discussions of it."
> >
> > Personally it's not my present goal or interest to focus on the 2nd
> > law. Truthfully, there are too many 2nd law formulations, as one
> > physicist may adhere to a stricter interpretation than another. My
> > only assertion is that energy can be captured from ambient
> > temperature, and here is how.
> >
> > Here is a clear-cut method to demonstrate the assertion. Using a
> > low noise high gain amp and oscilloscope view a resistors thermal
> > noise. This is an extremely simple task. I would be more than happy
> > to provide anyone legitimately interested individual with a simple
> > circuits to view such noise. You will see the thermal noise voltage
> > fluctuating in a random unpredictable fashion. Guess what, you are
> > witnessing a direct conversion from ambient temperature energy to
> > battery storage. A capacitor stores energy in the form of electric
> > potential. So where's the capacitor you ask. All measuring devices
> > from common amps to oscilloscopes have input capacitance.
>
> 10x scope probes run around 10-15 pF, IIRC. I think a 100x probe is
> rather lower.
>
> Opamp inputs tend to be a lot lower, tho, but still definitely finite
> and large enough to have a macroscopic impact on a circuit.
>
> So, yeah, you're seeing a cap charge and discharge, alright...
>
>
> > If you want more capacitance than simply place a small capacitor
> > across the resistor. You will still see the thermal noise voltage,
> > but the average rms voltage amplitude will decrease. There's now a
> > total of 4 pF if your amp has 2 pF input and you add a 2pF across
> > the resistor. Lets say at a given moment you see 10 mV across the
> > capacitor. At that moment you could unplug the capacitor to claim
> > your energy. LOL, indeed it's a small amount of energy, but it is
> > true that you actually captured energy from ambient temperature. If
> > you want more energy then simply make more devices.
> >
> > Please note I am not stating this is your "smoking gun!" This is
> > ***MERELY*** to demonstrate the possibility, to let people know it
> > is indeed possible!! If you have the money and technology such as
> > IBM then it's possible to make trillions of such devices in a small
> > area. One device could be a nanometer. One hundred trillion 2 pF
> > capacitors at 10 mV each contains 10 mJ's of energy. If memory
> > holds true, the human eye in complete darkness can see a flash of
> > red focused light of less than 1 nJ. One 780 nm red light photon
> > contains just 2.5E-19 J's!
> >
> > Ten mJ's may not sound like much, but it merely demonstrates that
> > you can capture energy from ambient temperature. This is not the
> > best method of capturing ambient temperature energy, but again it
> > merely proves the assertion.
> >
> > Again, in the nutshell, a resistor generates thermal voltage
> > noise. All measuring devices from common amps to oscilloscopes to
> > multimeters always have a certain amount of capacitance. When you
> > measured that thermal noise voltage that capacitor in the measuring
> > device is charged to that value. You can also add your own capacitor
> > across the resistor. Your capacitor would be completely discharged
> > before you add it, but at any given moment once the capacitor is
> > connected to the resistor their will be a certain charged voltage on
> > the capacitor. At any given moment you could unplug the capacitor to
> > retain such energy. You could perform the same experiment with an
> > inductor since all measuring devices have inductance.
> >
> > What you do with such energy is your choice. One hundred 2 pF
> > capacitors charged to 10 mV is very usable. That's equal to a 200
> > farad capacitor charged to 10 mV. You could discharge the cap
> > energy to an inductor followed by a quick field collapse to generate
> > appreciable amount of voltage across a smaller cap. Or you could
> > place a percentage of the caps in series to increase the voltage,
> > etc. etc.
> >
> > Skeptics may wonder just how much energy is required to "unplug" the
> > capacitor. There is no theoretical limit.
>
> Right -- if there's a fatal flaw in the scheme, the energy to unplug
> the capacitor is _not_ that flaw!
>
>
> > How much energy does it require to move a nanometer filament a
> > fraction of a nanometer? History demonstrates that the amount of
> > energy required from an electrical switch has drastically
> > decreased. Consider the FET, which on average has roughly 1E+12 ohms
> > DC resistance. Sure, the FET has capacitance, but that in itself is
> > stored energy. This is akin to how much energy is require to stop an
> > object. One might think it requires a lot pressure to stop the
> > object. Consider a spinning wheel next to a table. On the table is a
> > hollow metal tube welded to the table. To stop the spinning wheel
> > one merely needs to slide a metal bar in the hollow tube extending
> > out the other end of the hollow tube, which jams in the wheels
> > spokes, which abruptly stops the spinning wheel. The only amount of
> > energy required to stop the wheel merely depends how much energy was
> > required to slide the metal bar to jam the spokes.
> >
> > On many occasions I've described a device that has far higher
> > potential for "free energy" than the aforementioned example. The
> > above is to provide a simple undeniable clear-cut example. Of course
> > there will always be those who will deny anything that goes against
> > their beliefs. A more practical device that requires ***NO***
> > energy such as from a switch would be my resistor and LED device.
> > The thermal voltage noise from the resistor will generate thermal
> > current in the LED. All LED's emit photos at any applied voltage. It
> > just turns out the LED is exponentially more efficient above the
> > forward voltage level. In such a device the LED would emit more
> > photons when connected to a resistor of high resistance.
>
> I still have some problems with this one.
>
> First, an LED typically has a large forward drop (or at least they
> used to, I assume that hasn't changed in the last decade or so). If
> there's any effect at all, most of it's going to get cut off due to
> that big drop.
>
> If rectifying noise is to work, I should think you'd want to use
> something (like a Schottky diode) with a very low forward drop.
>
> Second, nearly all your noise is very close to zero volts, and close
> to zero volts, diodes are close to linear. They conduct as something
> like I = I_s * (exp(x*v) - 1) where "x" is a constant I don't feel
> like writing out. This is from a book but the general form is easy
> enough to verify in a lab (though tedious). Very close to zero volts,
> this formula is very close to
>
> I = I_s * x * v
>
> or, in other words, the diode is (nearly) linear at zero volts. That
> suggests that it might leak really badly in an application where
> the signal strength is totally minute.
>
> These may just be practical concerns but it's not clear how to get
> past them.
>
> I don't know enough about LEDs to answer this additional question: Can
> an LED operate "backwards", as a solar cell? This may be a concern at
> very low emission rates.
As you pointed out, LED's emit appreciable energy above forward voltage.
Although according to real experiments and Spice sims the LED just does not
suddenly go from emitting to not emitting photons. In fact, there's no magical
level where an LED suddenly changes.
> >
> > Lets consider photovoltaic cells. Even at room temperature in
> > complete darkness (no solar) there are visible light photons
> > striking the cell. I calculate a 10 cm x 10 cm common solar cell
> > would generate roughly 1E-30 volts. Not much voltage, lol, but
> > still something nonetheless. The amount of radiated blackbody
> > energy is small in the visible region. Although the FIR region is
> > another story. Both sides of a thin sheet of 1m x 1m material
> > radiates roughly 920 watts continuously in complete darkness at room
> > temperature. Technology is improving, thereby allowing photovoltaic
> > cells to capture lower and lower frequencies. A Canadian university
> > succeeded in creating a 1355 nm photovoltaic cell! That's only
> > 1/11th the wavelength away from the peak 15000 nm 920 watts/m^2
> > blackbody 300 K radiation. BTW, blackbody radiation at 1355 nm is
> > 2E+18 times greater than visible region of 600 nm. To calculate this
> > I compared the radiation from 16667 to 16677 cm^-1, which is
> > 3.907E-29 watts to 7380 to 7390 cm^-1, which is 7.499e-11 watts.
> >
> > University of Toronto in Canada achieves 1355 nm photovoltaic cell:
> > http://nanotechweb.org/articles/news/4/1/7/1
> >
> > Eventually technology will reach the peak 15000 nm region where a
> > thin double sided 1m x 1m sheet receives ~920 watts. It's difficult
> > for a person to believe they are surrounded by a source "free
> > energy" because we don't see such energy with our eyes.
>
> This one still really bugs me. I don't understand solar cells well
> enough to know if this could work, but it just seems /wrong/ to me
> that a cell at the same temperature as a blackbody could generate
> useful electricity from the blackbody's radiation! (Even a solar
> cell made in Canada!) :-)
The problem with typical visible light photovoltaic cells is there's hardly any
black body radiation in the visible light spectrum. I calculated/guesstimated
that such a cell would generate less than 1E-30 DC volts. On the other hand the
university in Canada made a significant breakthrough in photovoltaic cells by
allowing such cells efficiently absorb up to 1355 nm. Now that 1355 nm doesn't
sound like much as compared to 600 nm visible light, but blackbody radiation at
1355 nm is 2E+18 times greater than at 600 nm visible light.
To give an idea just how much energy is available from blackbody radiation alone
--> A two sided thin sheet of material at room temperature (300K) radiates ~920
watts, which is peak at around 15000 nm. It will be very interesting when
technology increases from 1355 nm 15000 nm! :-) Last week I came across a forum
posting about the Canadian breakthrough, but cannot find it for the life of me.
There were physicists (or at least they sounded like physicists) saying things
that absolutely shocked me. Statements to the effect, "we're almost to the point
of collecting continuous ambient temperature radiation."
Nature's not that cruel, right? I'm mean, surely we could design a device to
collect energy from a room full of bouncing basketballs. What about large
molecules? What about typical air molecules? What about room temperature atoms
vibrating at ~20 THz? What about vibrating electrons traveling ~1/200 c? Is
there a sudden magical size where nature says, "No! These particles are off
limits. You cannot have their energy!" I don't thinks so because of the simple
fact that a capacitor is able to charge to a certain point due to thermal
electrical noise.
IMHO the task is in trying to find a design that is able to capture enough
ambient temperature energy without an appreciable loss. Some realistic
possibilities would include an LED array consisting of a trillion LED & R units.
Or perhaps improving photovoltaic cells to reach 15000 nm's. Those methods
sound complex. Truly if this was my task alone then I would first begin by
learning how to create a simple diode. I already know how to use a computer to
operate a circuit through the parallel port or USB. Therefore, I would design a
device that allowed the computer to create micro scale diodes and resistors.
Initially this may sound to complex and expensive, but I would beg to disagree.
I like the old saying, "Where there's a will there's a way."
Truthfully I see a clear method of extracting such ambient temperature by means
of magnetic avalanches, but time will tell.
Regards,
Paul Lowrance
