http://solreka.com/blog/free-energy/what-is-free-energy/ solar lights, ovens, chargers, december 21 2012, conspiracy theories blog Mon, 07 May 2012 14:42:49 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 http://solreka.com/blog/free-energy/what-is-free-energy/comment-page-1/#comment-48593 shawnnweed Wed, 24 Nov 2010 10:14:49 +0000 http://solreka.com/blog/?p=31#comment-48593 Free energy is possible to an extent. If you follow the rules of thermodynmics you will see that it is probable. However the rules of thermodynamics are basically this..1)you can't win...2)the best you can do is break even...and 3)the only way to break even is at absolute zero. The main reason you have to be at absolute zero is that electrons form in cooper pairs when superconducting. You need to be able to transfer energy without resistance and the only way is through superconductors. However last month scientist combined copper with magnesium to form a superconductor that operates at only 17 degrees Fahrenheit. This means that you perform superconduction without power hungry machines. In a natural environment it would work in the North or South Pole or at certain high elevations such as mountaintops where temps are normally very low. DOn't feel like moving to Alsaka, me neither, just put it in your refrigerator freezer to test it. Secondly, the best you could do is balance the equation. All you could do is get an equal exchange of energy between two objects; such as a 100% efficient solar cell and LED. However they would have to be 100% effeicient or this would never work. Right now the best we have on the market is 20% effeicient. There is a way to make one close to 100% effeicient but it would be expensive. You would have to add two Nanotech panels together...one which is functioning( made by a ten year old boy whose dad is also into nanotech) and that absorbs 'UV' and visible light. The other is an actual panel that absorbs only IR light and is tauted to be 80% effeicient theoretically, but only if they can find a way of harnessing the energy, which means it is nonfuntional. At a rough guess if a person were to combine these it would be about 99% efficient. Needless to say this would have to be placed in a closed environment such as a reflective mirror box so that light would not be wasted. Do not get me wrong once light hits the solar cell it becomes useless incident light; once reflected. But not all reflected light is useless. There is much light wasted because it never gets a chance to hit the cell and is therefore wasted by spilling over the side of the cell. The mirror box would prevent this by reflecting the non used light onto the cell. The mirrors would have to be near 100% reflective so they would have to be laser mirrors(99% reflective). A regular mirror is at best 98% reflective which is not close enough. The LED's would have to be warm white LED's that are very high in lumen output. They would have to be high voltage and low amperage, simply because it is easy for the solar panels to produce voltage but difficult for them to produce amperage or current. They would have to be 'warm' white simply because wthout IR light you can not get the solar cells to produce a large current. Regular LED's have no IR or UV light. Visisble light only accountd for about 3% of the current, IR accounts for about 80% of the current and UV light accounts for about 17% of the current. A simple color swath test will confirm this. Also you would have to use monocrystaline solar cells simply because the light emission absorbancy is nearly identical to the Warm White LED spectrum. They are like hand in glove. There would be some people that would say alright how about the light being 100% effecient. I would simply tell them that it is impossible because light carries heat, even if in low amounts. However, give the panel a steady amount of light and it will give you a steady current, even if it is slowly depeleting. EX. I could theoretically make an hour glass that could be so large and pass sand so slowly that it would last longer than your life. Even though the light is depeleting by using LED's it could happen at such as slow rate that you could sustain perpetual light/energy for about nine years. Even though most LED's are rated at 11 years you have to rememeber that a some point the Led will not produce enough energy, through the solar cell, to run itself. As it depleats in energy the voltage or amperage will drop below the minimal operatng specs of the LED and it will turn off. However, with all these things in place you could come very close to balancing the equation for an extended period of time. Once the light has brought itself to about a 15% loss of lumen, after roughly nine years, and can no longer sustain itself; simply replace it. An lastly there would be no way to harnass the energy without breaking the balance and shutting down the whole balance which brings you back to rule one...you can't win. So you could have a pretty cool perpetual energy object that you could never get a chance to see actually working(because it's enclosed), that could do no work(because it's only balanced), and would be something akin to a plasma ball; neat to have but useless. In theory it is absolutley possible. the mathematical theorum would look like this...Led input - PV output=0 (given 3 things: 100%effeciency of both solarcell and LED and connection through superconduction). This doesn not break the first, second or third law of physics. and good luck...shawnnweed@hotmail.com. Free energy is possible to an extent. If you follow the rules of thermodynmics you will see that it is probable. However the rules of thermodynamics are basically this..1)you can’t win…2)the best you can do is break even…and 3)the only way to break even is at absolute zero. The main reason you have to be at absolute zero is that electrons form in cooper pairs when superconducting. You need to be able to transfer energy without resistance and the only way is through superconductors. However last month scientist combined copper with magnesium to form a superconductor that operates at only 17 degrees Fahrenheit. This means that you perform superconduction without power hungry machines. In a natural environment it would work in the North or South Pole or at certain high elevations such as mountaintops where temps are normally very low. DOn’t feel like moving to Alsaka, me neither, just put it in your refrigerator freezer to test it. Secondly, the best you could do is balance the equation. All you could do is get an equal exchange of energy between two objects; such as a 100% efficient solar cell and LED. However they would have to be 100% effeicient or this would never work. Right now the best we have on the market is 20% effeicient. There is a way to make one close to 100% effeicient but it would be expensive. You would have to add two Nanotech panels together…one which is functioning( made by a ten year old boy whose dad is also into nanotech) and that absorbs ‘UV’ and visible light. The other is an actual panel that absorbs only IR light and is tauted to be 80% effeicient theoretically, but only if they can find a way of harnessing the energy, which means it is nonfuntional. At a rough guess if a person were to combine these it would be about 99% efficient. Needless to say this would have to be placed in a closed environment such as a reflective mirror box so that light would not be wasted. Do not get me wrong once light hits the solar cell it becomes useless incident light; once reflected. But not all reflected light is useless. There is much light wasted because it never gets a chance to hit the cell and is therefore wasted by spilling over the side of the cell. The mirror box would prevent this by reflecting the non used light onto the cell. The mirrors would have to be near 100% reflective so they would have to be laser mirrors(99% reflective). A regular mirror is at best 98% reflective which is not close enough. The LED’s would have to be warm white LED’s that are very high in lumen output. They would have to be high voltage and low amperage, simply because it is easy for the solar panels to produce voltage but difficult for them to produce amperage or current. They would have to be ‘warm’ white simply because wthout IR light you can not get the solar cells to produce a large current. Regular LED’s have no IR or UV light. Visisble light only accountd for about 3% of the current, IR accounts for about 80% of the current and UV light accounts for about 17% of the current. A simple color swath test will confirm this. Also you would have to use monocrystaline solar cells simply because the light emission absorbancy is nearly identical to the Warm White LED spectrum. They are like hand in glove.
There would be some people that would say alright how about the light being 100% effecient. I would simply tell them that it is impossible because light carries heat, even if in low amounts. However, give the panel a steady amount of light and it will give you a steady current, even if it is slowly depeleting. EX. I could theoretically make an hour glass that could be so large and pass sand so slowly that it would last longer than your life. Even though the light is depeleting by using LED’s it could happen at such as slow rate that you could sustain perpetual light/energy for about nine years. Even though most LED’s are rated at 11 years you have to rememeber that a some point the Led will not produce enough energy, through the solar cell, to run itself. As it depleats in energy the voltage or amperage will drop below the minimal operatng specs of the LED and it will turn off. However, with all these things in place you could come very close to balancing the equation for an extended period of time. Once the light has brought itself to about a 15% loss of lumen, after roughly nine years, and can no longer sustain itself; simply replace it. An lastly there would be no way to harnass the energy without breaking the balance and shutting down the whole balance which brings you back to rule one…you can’t win. So you could have a pretty cool perpetual energy object that you could never get a chance to see actually working(because it’s enclosed), that could do no work(because it’s only balanced), and would be something akin to a plasma ball; neat to have but useless. In theory it is absolutley possible. the mathematical theorum would look like this…Led input – PV output=0 (given 3 things: 100%effeciency of both solarcell and LED and connection through superconduction). This doesn not break the first, second or third law of physics.
and good luck…shawnnweed@hotmail.com.

]]> http://solreka.com/blog/free-energy/what-is-free-energy/comment-page-1/#comment-48 Free energy, Alternative power, Free and sustainable energy sources. | SolReka - Solar Cooking and Alternative Energy News Sun, 30 Mar 2008 02:41:03 +0000 http://solreka.com/blog/?p=31#comment-48 [...] What is free energy? [...] [...] What is free energy? [...]

]]>