eer

F

FEerguy9

Guest
Electronic electricity repository is an energy concept that aims to accumulate
and store electrical energy from any source. The storage would be intended to
accommodate such things as electric vehicles, home heating, etc. The best
example is the EV - an electric car that would run on an ever-accumulating
power source. That is to say, any and all sources of electrical energy --
including diffuse sources -- would be collected, combined and stored in the
form of capacitance. But, wouldn't the capacitor plates be bigger than the
vehicle? Well, yes they would, unless a way to increase the surface area of
the plates *within a small perimeter* could be fashioned. The plates (and the
dielectric) *must* match exactly, to gain optimum charge. I suggest that
Scanning Tunneling Microscope Technology, or possibly even nanotechnology be
used to accomplish this -- whatever could configure roughly halfway to the
molecular level. Doing this -- configuring massive surface area within a small
perimeter -- is the heart of eer. It could involve steps, or grooves to 'tuck'
the surface areas away. BTW, this would necessarily require a *much* stronger
dielectric, which admittedly is taken on faith - but it could be many years
away.
The object is to configure the plates and dielectric so they all fit like
Jell-O in a mold, and to make these all small in perimeter -- while yielding
enormous surface area. That way, it is hoped, enough charge could be stored to
run an EV. Further, it is expected that about 15 sources of renewable energy
(solar, wind, wave, etc.) would be able to contribute to the 'eer pool' of
stored electrical energy. In time, renewable energy stored in this way could
effectively replace fossil fuels and batteries for vehicles.
The renewable sources need not necessarily have a device actually *on* the
vehicle; it is anticipated that such renewable devices could be located, say,
in or on a garage, and the electric charge transferred to the vehicle when
required.
I ask you -- with the advent of electric cars, might not this concept (if it
worked) pretty much end our dependence on oil?

NOTE: This idea absolutely, in no way, breaks the Second Law! No more than a
12v car battery does.




Frank Lincoln
FEerguy9@cs.com
eerguy9@aol.com
eerguy2000@yahoo.com

PS: In case you hadn't noticed, I am VERY weak with computers.



More, if you like..........

This is no more than a guess from a novice




There are some mistakes in here

In one sentence, I am saying that a very, very advanced capacitor is possible,
and would accommodate most of the energy problems we have today -- basically it
would do the job that the energy function of oil now does.


An energy concept


Yes, there is a 21st Law of Thermodynamics. That is no knock on Faraday, just
a reference to the 21st century, and the new technology it has brought.

Simply stated, it is, "No energy concept involving renewables shall ever be
considered unless the word 'diffuse' is used, understood, and taken into
consideration."

Faraday could not have seen this coming. In his day, there was not the
multitude of diffuse renewable energy sources available, which can be converted
to electricity.

If human beings are ever to use renewable, natural energy sources, they will
have to take into consideration the diffuse nature of sunlight, wind, wave,
etc. I was actually surprised to find that Faraday, himself, used the word
"diffuse" in his writings. But, this was in reference to the spread of charge
on capacitor plates, and not the UN-concentrated free energy that is available
today for conversion to electricity.

There is NO way around this Law. By that, I mean that there in no way around
solving the "diffuse problem," before we are able to put renewable energy
sources to work in any effective way.



A goal......an idea......a prediction.......energy is easy........ there is no
crises.

We don't need oil.
We don't need batteries.
We don't need internal combustion engines.
We don't need fusion.
We don't need hybrids.
We don't need hydrogen-powered cars.
We don't need ethanol.
We don't need natural gas.
We don't need methane.
We don't even need efficiency.
We don't even need conservation.

All we need are the renewable energy sources that God - in His infinite wisdom
-- provided us.

Some could be used, some not. For a while. Eventually renewable energy
sources would be all we would need to power our EV's, and heat our homes. We
would have the luxury of choice, while at the same time powering our EV's with
them. All of them. Any of them. As long as they are able to generate any
amount of electricity.

To those who have read this before, and may have rejected it out of hand, let
me say that it is my strong belief that two major companies may be engaged in
pretty much the basic idea presented here. They have patents - I do not. In no
way do I - nor will I - attempt to claim any right whatsoever to this idea --
even though all my writing on it came from my own independent thinking for over
12 years. I wish them well. But, in case I am wrong about that effort being
made, I surely wish some interested party would help me connect this to the
people in government who say they want an energy solution. What they are
looking for is contained on this letter. I am THAT confident.

Note: I can see EER powering an automobile. That is almost a lock, in my mind.
Further applications are, perhaps, a little harder to deal with. Once a car
IS powered by EER, then all the entrepreneurs will take the rest to the logical
conclusion. For the most part, EER will be discussed in terms of an electric
vehicle.


EER in Brief


Electronic Electricity Repository (EER) is merely a concept at this time. There
is no business, no patent, and no money involved with this.

This involves solid state capacitors as a usable energy storage device for
electric vehicles, and other items. Conventional wisdom limits capacitors to
power surges, and the like. The full text of this concept will suggest a way to
make them fully competitive with the internal combustion engine, while not
violating the laws of energy density.

The easiest way to explain it is to use an electric vehicle as an
example. To power an EV with EER, an array of electronic devices --
perhaps solid-state capacitors, perhaps another device -- would
contain the electrical charge accumulated from a variety of sources
of electricity. Renewable energy sources are suggested, but *any*
source of electricity would work. With the questionable future of
battery-powered EV's, and fusion as an energy source, and the political debate
about fossil fuels, there are strong reasons to take a look at EER.

In fairness, many say it cannot be done. But, perhaps another war
-- or avoiding one -- could put the right minds to work on this concept. It
*would* provide a way to be independent of foreign oil, while providing a
structure for the transition to renewable forms of energy to power EV's - or
any other device powered by electricity.

This is merely a shell of an idea, but perhaps some further thought could help
bring it about.

Frank Lincoln....72430,2407......Feerguy9@cs.com
**************************************************************************
**************************



A TRIP TO THE STORE IN AN EER POWERED EV

Let's suppose that the EER concept is fully developed, and built
into an electric vehicle. Let's also suppose that the newest and best
technological devices -- some of which are now being used in EV's - are
integrated into the vehicle's design. What follows is a description
of what might possibly have happened during an everyday trip to the store
in such a vehicle. (This assumes the use of an *advanced* solid-state
capacitor).
Ms. Jones notices her "fuel gauge" as she starts her vehicle; it
tells her that her microchip capacitor battery is 85% full. This means
that of the vast number of microchip capacitors in her "battery," 85% are
charged with their very small electric capacitance.
She proceeds to the store, and returns home -- a quarter mile
trip. As she pulls in her driveway, she looks again at her gauge. It
reads 84%. She thinks that she used only 1% of her battery capacity for
her trip.
But, she is wrong.
She used 10% of her available charged capacitors for the quarter
mile trip. So, why didn't her gauge read 75% when she returned?
There were several devices built into her vehicle which were
replenishing used capacitors, almost as fast as she was using them. (All
figures below are guesses -- just to make the point.)

1. The advanced solar panel on the roof of her vehicle was, as
always during sunlight, continuously recharging at a slow, but
steady rate. Because she had happened to drive and park in
the sunlight, the solar panel recharged 5% of her capacitors.
2. The air scoops arranged in her vehicle's design -- although
accounting for some drag -- were directing the air through
small dynamos, which recharged another 2%.
3. The regenerative brakes on all four wheels replenished another
2% of the capacitors.

So, she did, in fact, use 10% of the available capacitor charges,
but 9% were replaced by the activity of her trip.
This is nothing like perpetual motion; it is merely taking
advantage of the natural surrounding energy to replenish the energy
spent on the trip.
It is even conceivable that her "fuel gauge" might have read a
higher percentage upon her return; a shorter trip on a windier and
sunnier day, in a more sunlit route and parking spot, and many more
occasions to use the brakes, might have made that possible. The Second
Law of Thermodynamics is not violated, because energy from outside the
vehicle was being absorbed along the way.
It is noted that a battery-powered EV could have done much the
same, but the weight difference would have changed the percentages, so
as to defeat the purpose.
Frank Lincoln CS# 72430,2407
**************************************************************************
**************************



It is understood that high energy density is something that has been sought for
many years -- the concept is nothing new. What is suggested here is the
possibility that modern technology may now be in the position to actually
attain it -- to a degree that could combine the many energy sources (new and
old) into a common pool.


GIVEN:
- Trench capacitors, at the present time, have nowhere near the capability to
deal with the degree of energy that would be required in Electronic Electricity
Repository.
- The area of the plates in a trench capacitor will, for the most part,
determine the capacitance -- not exclusively, but this is the factor that is
dealt with here as having the most potential for improvement. It is assumed
that progress in the other factors -- dielectric strength, dielectric
composition, etc., will continue, and will accommodate the supposition of
surface area increase made here.

HYPOTHESIS:
- The surface area of a trench capacitor plate can be greatly increased without
increasing the perimeter, or the space required to store the capacitor.
- Etching a groove on the plate surface will do this, to a small degree, and it
is done, to some extent, today. What is surmised, here, is that, as the
technology allows, many cross-grooves could be etched *within* the first
groove. Then, with increasing precision, these cross-grooves could, in turn, be
cross-grooved. And, then those cross-grooves cross-grooved. Each successive
cross-grooving would be progressively smaller - magnitudes smaller. This could
be repeated until the molecular level was reached -- each time increasing the
surface area of the plate, and thus the capacitance. An inexact estimate of the
number of times it could be repeated is 26. It is surmised that each groove,
cross-groove, and, etc., would be matched by a ridge, a cross-ridge, and, etc.,
on the opposite plate, with corresponding shapes for the dielectric. The
resulting configuration would yield a perfectly matching set of plates
(sandwiching an appropriately shaped, and expectedly advanced dielectric). Such
a configuration and material composition may not be possible at this time, but
the direction of efforts in their respective technologies may lead to their
development in the very near future. This concept is put forth in
*anticipation* of those developments.
- In theory, each successive etching would substantially increase the area of
the plates, and thus the capacitance *without increasing their size*, their
perimeter, or the volume of space needed for them. Again, the only barrier
seems to be at reaching the molecular level, after each groove is re-grooved,
perpendicularly, and then THAT groove is re-grooved, etc. This would take
advantage of all the "inner space" available between the plate surface, and the
molecular level. (Understand that in place of "etching," Scanning Tunneling
Microscope Technology might be applied -- or even nanotechnology, if that ever
becomes reality. The point is to configure the grooves -- by whatever method.)

BENEFITS:
- An almost endless storage system for electricity.
- A way to store electricity from *any* source, from renewables to a wall
socket.
- A possible solution to the search for a better power plant for electric
vehicles.
- A structure within which to make the conversion from fossil fuels to
renewables.
- A way to accumulate the "trickle" of the many forms of renewable energy, and
combine and store them in a practical way; a way that could give strength to
the many "weak" and diffuse renewable energy sources.
An attempt to generally suggest HOW to accomplish EER will be made; this will
be based on the feedback received so far on this concept. For the most part,
feedback has come from various forums in CompuServe. All major objections will
be mentioned, and a way around each one will be suggested.
ENERGY DENSITY - This appears to be the leading objection to EER. In the
strongest terms, it is postulated, here, that there is no sacred or permanent
universal limit to energy density -- there are only hurdles. There *are* limits
to present materials and there *are* limits to a given geometry, but no
universal scientific boundary that would stand forever and always. There are
certainly physical limits to the materials *now* being used, but, this concept
of EER does, indeed, depend upon progress in this area -- improvements in
materials are bound to happen. Unless human progress is at its maximum, there
is reason for such an expectation. Especially since -- many say -- technology
is doubling every day with computer technology, and since many of the best
resources in the world are focused on this type of science. (If anything like
this concept of EER ever happens, it will be as a natural development of such
materials -- and NOT a result of this effort; that is quite thoroughly
understood.)
It is suggest here that even without improvements in dieletrics, there may be
opportunity to vastly improve their capability with the one factor -- geography
of the plates.

Just as computers changed everything about information, some form of EER may
change the way energy is dealt with. The suggestion, above, regarding etching
grooves in trench capacitor plates, and then etching those grooves, etc., is
offered as a possible way to provide the structure that would enable a
monumentally higher energy density, than has ever been achieved. If the
geometry of the plates is configured as suggested here, and they are
identically wrinkled, it is expected that a very high energy density could be
achieved by taking advantage of the inner space. The accumulation of a massive
repelling force between plates is a problem for which no answer will be
attempted here. But, mechanics aside, it appears that developing technology
will, indeed, provide the tools necessary to configure the plates.

CAPACITOR LEAKAGE - Two points here: 1) Leakage in trench capacitors is not
nearly as big a problem as it was a few short years ago -- holding a charge for
an electric vehicle, for example, would be well within the cycle of usage. In
other words, an EV would be expected to be used often enough to use the charges
before they have time to leak. 2) The percentage of loss due to leakage could
logically be offset by overloading the capacitor bank by a like percentage.
This is somewhat of a built-in inefficiency, but in time, wouldn't the leakage
problem be expected to continue to improve?

ARCHING - The concern about electrical arching between the extremely small
dimensions created by the etching and re-etching can only be explained away by
a layman in this way: the extremely small dimensions would occur between parts
of the same plate - and *not* between the opposing plates. The surfaces of the
two plates would remain equidistant over the entire area. It is expected that
the extremely small dimensions would mainly occur between points on the same
plate, at the same potential -- and, thus, no arching would be anticipated.

ATOMIC LEVEL - In a pretty thorough analysis in the LEAP forum, it was
indicated that "the whole idea of a capacitor thus breaks down as we approach
atomic dimensions." (The following assumes abilities predicted by some as to
etching, Scanning Tunneling Microscope Technology, atomic force microscope,
lithography, or other methods.) If you make one groove (G1) in a capacitor
plate, that certainly does not approach atomic dimensions, yet it does increase
the surface area of the plate (without increasing its perimeter). Then, if you
go back and make another groove (G2) WITHIN G1's SURFACE, you are closer -- but
still not near the atomic level. Then if the surface of G2 is etched (or STM'd)
with G3, you are closer yet; closer -- but still a long way from the atomic
level. How far? Well, the number 26 seems to hold up as the number of times
you could re-etch grooves, before you hit bottom.
(Each successive etching step would be, say, a hundred times smaller than the
previous one. G3 is a hundred times smaller than G2. G2 is a hundred times
smaller than G1, and etc. G26 would be the smallest, and would begin to enter
atomic dimensions.)
Now, backing up, let's say you made a hundred tiny grooves on the surface of
the original plate -- so you have 100 G1's. Within each G1, you etch 100 much
smaller G2's. Within each G2 you etch 100 G3's, which are yet, again, much
smaller. This is a million grooves at the 3rd of 26 steps. If you could
continue on in this way for 26 re-groovings of the grooves, how many grooves
would you have at the 26th step? And, by how much would you have increased the
surface area of that plate? And how much more dipole moment effect would now
take place? And how much more ability to hold charge would you have? If the
number 26 makes you cranky, stop at 20, or 12.
The point is this: there is a tremendous amount of "inner space" available
*before* you reach atomic level. Perhaps an optimum number could be safely
reached. Even 12 would seem to provide a monumental increase in charge storage
ability. Subject to mathematicians' scrutiny, there may be 10^24 grooves, when
you are only halfway down to atomic level, and free of the terrible things that
happen there. At the halfway point, you have monumentally increased the surface
area, without threatening stability. Assuming that the dielectric follows the
shape of the plate exactly, have you not vastly increased the number of
molecules subject to polar realignment in the electric field? Could it be said
that, even though the individual dipole moments would stay at the same in
magnitude, there is an opportunity to create a tremendously larger number of
them, by taking advantage of the inner space available?

MASS PRODUCTION - Some of these techniques to reform very small structures are
very slow and very expensive. Some question was raised as to their adaptability
to a mass production situation. As with any change in technology, first efforts
are not usually efficient. But there seems to be enough advantages to EER so
that the forces of supply and demand would push the costs down. Once in the
competitive market, improvements in technique could be expected.

GROOVES TOO SMALL? - A statement made in one of the forums was, "There is a
limit to how small the grooves can be before they don't work any more." As this
was from a good source, it is taken seriously. If some of the logic, above,
doesn't account for this, there may be difficulty, here.

DISCHARGE TIME - Capacitors normally discharge very quickly, so wouldn't they
make a rather bad storage device? No detailed answer will be attempted, here,
but can't this be controlled with a very low discharge current, with a high
resistance?

Electricity is -- or can be -- the common denominator for all energy sources,
from solar to hydro. It is for exactly this reason that EER could employ each
and every energy source. All the new renewable technology could be "fed" into
EER - without exception. Yet, at the same time, conventional sources could
contribute to it -- every drop of oil and every lump of coal on this planet
could be used, purposely. Could this captured energy not then be put to use, as
needed, and when needed, by controlling the energy bursts to simulate
conventional electricity flow?

*******************

The technology that would be needed for EER *seems* to be within sight - with
some faith required, perhaps, for the materials. Basically, it is the ability
to sculpt materials at the molecular level which brought about this revised
approach to EER. I have never seen the etching process, nor STM; this whole
concept of extremely small sculpting to obtain extremely high surface area is
drawn from my imagination -- and the little I have read about these processes.
I am motivated by the extreme advantages that would come about, and the
apparent ability to accomplish this; if not on a production basis, then at
least on a prototype basis, to start. I'm certain there are still technical
errors in this effort -- it is hoped that the general idea was communicated
with some adequacy. This *seems* possible - or within reach - to me, and it
*seems* as though it would bring about profound benefits, and it *seems* to me
that it is a logical way to approach energy at this point in time.

But, I defer to the experts.
**************************************************************************
**************************

I have no patent on this idea. My motivation is not monetary.

I understand that this could not be done today, because of limits on existing
dieletrics, and perhaps other items. My position is that EER is not impossible,
given advances in some technologies.

Please respond by Email
or call at (248) 288-3459
Feerguy9@cs.com
Frank Lincoln

Please keep in mind that EER would allow energy from any and all sources to be
stored and combined in such a way that an electric vehicle could, at some later
time, be powered by it.





Separating a steel sample using a tensile tester could be useful in EER.

The jagged edges could be cut off, just past their breakpoint. Call these two
pieces of jagged metal our capacitor plates. The broken pieces are matched
molecular for molecule. If a dielectric is molded between the two jagged ends,
the fit could not be better. "d" is maintained. The area of the matching jagged
edges is much, much more than the cross section of the steel sample. We then
have matching capacitor plates without using STM to configure all the surfaces.



Note: EER may not solve all energy problems, but in my opinion, it could
certainly power personal vehicles.

Anyone who receives this is free to publish.




Feerguy9@cs.com
eerguy9@aol.com
 
Electronic electricity repository is an whacko energy concept that aims to
clog this newsgroup with meaningless, utterly unworkable notions posted
by someone who clearly doesn't understand the subject matter and who
refuses to take the time to learn even the basics that relate to it. It can
safely be ignored by all. It will never ever be used to accumulate
and store electrical energy from any source. The storage would be intended
to
accommodate such things as electric vehicles, home heating, etc., but of
course can't possibly work in any of these. The best
example is the EV - an electric car that would run on an ever-accumulating
power source - but, of course, this is the worst sort of idiotic fantasy.
That is to say, no possible sources of electrical energy - including
"diffuse"
sources, whatever the hell those are -- will ever be collected, combined or
stored in the form of capacitance. But, the observant reader will ask,
isn't this
the most absurd idea ever to be presented in this group? Well, yes, of
course
it is, unless a way to increase Frank's grasp of the obvious can be found
and
he is finally persuaded to stop posting this lunacy here. To achieve this,
though,
we're going to have to hope that some means of adding brain cells *within a
small perimeter* can be fashioned. I suggest that Scanning Tunneling
Microscope
Technology, or possibly even nanotechnology, might be used for the initial
task of locating whatever knowledge Frank actually has on this subject -
which
is believed to be of an order of magnitude roughly halfway to the molecular
level.
Doing this -- configuring massive idiocy within a nearly endless series of
meaningless
drivel, posted with nauseating regularity -- is the heart of eer. It could
involve steps
such as actually learning something about capacitance, but no - not Frank
BTW,
continuing to read this sort of stuff would necessarily require a *much*
stronger
stomach than is normally to be found among the readership of this group,
which
admittedly is taken on faith - but and end to it could clearly be many years
away.
Deal with it. The object is to configure Frank's understand of such topics
as plates
and dielectric so it's at least on par with what you'd expect from Jell-O in
a mold,
and to make these all small in perimeter -- that latter not being too much
of a
problem, clearly -- as there is enormous surface area of unused cerebrum
we're
dealing with, here. That way, it is hoped, enough information could be
stored to
cause Frank to finally wake up and abandon this idiotic pursuit - or to run
a very,
very small EV. Further, it is expected that about 15 sources of renewable
information
(engineers, technicians, hobbyists, the regular readership of this group.)
would be able to
contribute to the 'eer pool' of commentary debunking this whole lunatic
notion. No,
wait, that's already happened. In time, renewable knowledge stored in this
way could
effectively replace Frank's ravings, leaving us still with fossil fuels and
batteries for vehicles.
The renewable sources need not necessarily have a device actually *on* the
Net, as
Frank seems to ignore all such equally, anyway; it is anticipated that such
renewable
devices could be located, say, in or on a library or billboard, and would
still be just as
readily ignored I ask you -- with the advent of people who actually DO
understand
something of what's been basic to electronics for the last century or so,,
might not this
concept (since it will never work) pretty much end our dependence on Frank
for
entertainment?

PS: In case you hadn't noticed, Frank is VERY weak with computers. And
math.
And electronics. And basic physics. But boy, he sure knows how to post the
same nonsense over and over and over again, doesn't he? But, no truer words
were ever written in this or any other group then when Frank finally
admitted to the
following:

There are some mistakes in here
In one sentence, I am saying that if a very, very advanced capacitor were
possible,
and would accommodate most of the energy problems we have today -- basically
it
would do the job that the energy function of oil now does. But we do have
to admit
that it's that first part that gets us in the end, and we might as well be
saying that IF
flying jet-propelled elephants were possible, they could easily replace all
of the
airliners in existence today. One might as well wish for a genie in a lamp
to solve
all the world's energy problems.


Bob M.
 
Electronic electricity repository is an whacko energy concept that aims to
clog this newsgroup with meaningless, utterly unworkable notions posted
by someone who clearly doesn't understand the subject matter and who
refuses to take the time to learn even the basics that relate to it. It can
safely be ignored by all. It will never ever be used to accumulate
and store electrical energy from any source. The storage would be intended
to
accommodate such things as electric vehicles, home heating, etc., but of
course can't possibly work in any of these. The best
example is the EV - an electric car that would run on an ever-accumulating
power source - but, of course, this is the worst sort of idiotic fantasy.
That is to say, no possible sources of electrical energy - including
"diffuse"
sources, whatever the hell those are -- will ever be collected, combined or
stored in the form of capacitance. But, the observant reader will ask,
isn't this
the most absurd idea ever to be presented in this group? Well, yes, of
course
it is, unless a way to increase Frank's grasp of the obvious can be found
and
he is finally persuaded to stop posting this lunacy here. To achieve this,
though,
we're going to have to hope that some means of adding brain cells *within a
small perimeter* can be fashioned. I suggest that Scanning Tunneling
Microscope
Technology, or possibly even nanotechnology, might be used for the initial
task of locating whatever knowledge Frank actually has on this subject -
which
is believed to be of an order of magnitude roughly halfway to the molecular
level.
Doing this -- configuring massive idiocy within a nearly endless series of
meaningless
drivel, posted with nauseating regularity -- is the heart of eer. It could
involve steps
such as actually learning something about capacitance, but no - not Frank
BTW,
continuing to read this sort of stuff would necessarily require a *much*
stronger
stomach than is normally to be found among the readership of this group,
which
admittedly is taken on faith - but and end to it could clearly be many years
away.
Deal with it. The object is to configure Frank's understand of such topics
as plates
and dielectric so it's at least on par with what you'd expect from Jell-O in
a mold,
and to make these all small in perimeter -- that latter not being too much
of a
problem, clearly -- as there is enormous surface area of unused cerebrum
we're
dealing with, here. That way, it is hoped, enough information could be
stored to
cause Frank to finally wake up and abandon this idiotic pursuit - or to run
a very,
very small EV. Further, it is expected that about 15 sources of renewable
information
(engineers, technicians, hobbyists, the regular readership of this group.)
would be able to
contribute to the 'eer pool' of commentary debunking this whole lunatic
notion. No,
wait, that's already happened. In time, renewable knowledge stored in this
way could
effectively replace Frank's ravings, leaving us still with fossil fuels and
batteries for vehicles.
The renewable sources need not necessarily have a device actually *on* the
Net, as
Frank seems to ignore all such equally, anyway; it is anticipated that such
renewable
devices could be located, say, in or on a library or billboard, and would
still be just as
readily ignored I ask you -- with the advent of people who actually DO
understand
something of what's been basic to electronics for the last century or so,,
might not this
concept (since it will never work) pretty much end our dependence on Frank
for
entertainment?

PS: In case you hadn't noticed, Frank is VERY weak with computers. And
math.
And electronics. And basic physics. But boy, he sure knows how to post the
same nonsense over and over and over again, doesn't he? But, no truer words
were ever written in this or any other group then when Frank finally
admitted to the
following:


There are some mistakes in here


In one sentence, I am saying that if a very, very advanced capacitor were
possible,
and would accommodate most of the energy problems we have today -- basically
it
would do the job that the energy function of oil now does. But we do have
to admit
that it's that first part that gets us in the end, and we might as well be
saying that IF
flying jet-propelled elephants were possible, they could easily replace all
of the
airliners in existence today. One might as well wish for a genie in a lamp
to solve
all the world's energy problems.

Nice work, Bob.

WRONG, but nice.


Frank
 
"FEerguy9" <feerguy9@cs.com> wrote in message
news:20040120154028.24764.00000465@mb-m16.news.cs.com...
Nice work, Bob.

WRONG, but nice.
Too bad that you STILL, for some reason, can't SHOW why it's
wrong, Frank.

Gee, I wonder why that is?

Could it be that you simply have NO CLUE WHATSOEVER?



Bob M.
 
"FEerguy9" <feerguy9@cs.com> wrote in message
news:20040120154028.24764.00000465@mb-m16.news.cs.com...
Nice work, Bob.

WRONG, but nice.

Too bad that you STILL, for some reason, can't SHOW why it's
wrong, Frank.

Gee, I wonder why that is?

Could it be that you simply have NO CLUE WHATSOEVER?
No. It is because you cut off the subject, you nitwit.


Frank
 
"FEerguy9" <feerguy9@cs.com> wrote in message
news:20040122052801.22897.00000606@mb-m04.news.cs.com...

Could it be that you simply have NO CLUE WHATSOEVER?

No. It is because you cut off the subject, you nitwit.
Cut off the subject? Frank, you HAVE NO subject - you
have a ridiculous pipe dream that has been shown, quite
clearly, and time and time again, to be utterly unworkable.
Until you could come back with some REASONS as to
why we should believe otherwise - something that you have
to date NEVER done - you can rightly expect to continue
to be laughed at.

Bob M.
 
"FEerguy9" <feerguy9@cs.com> wrote in message
news:20040122052801.22897.00000606@mb-m04.news.cs.com...

Could it be that you simply have NO CLUE WHATSOEVER?

No. It is because you cut off the subject, you nitwit.

Cut off the subject? Frank, you HAVE NO subject - you
have a ridiculous pipe dream that has been shown, quite
clearly, and time and time again, to be utterly unworkable.
Until you could come back with some REASONS as to
why we should believe otherwise - something that you have
to date NEVER done - you can rightly expect to continue
to be laughed at.
I see.

The bottom line is that you all think that capacitors are limited (in energy
density) to what we have today.

I am TELLING you that we could configure capacitors to hold energy density
close to that of coal and oil.


Frank
 
feerguy9@cs.com (FEerguy9) wrote:
"FEerguy9" <feerguy9@cs.com> wrote in message
news:20040122052801.22897.00000606@mb-m04.news.cs.com...
Could it be that you simply have NO CLUE WHATSOEVER?

No. It is because you cut off the subject, you nitwit.

Cut off the subject? Frank, you HAVE NO subject - you
have a ridiculous pipe dream that has been shown, quite
clearly, and time and time again, to be utterly unworkable.
Until you could come back with some REASONS as to
why we should believe otherwise - something that you have
to date NEVER done - you can rightly expect to continue
to be laughed at.

I see.

The bottom line is that you all think that capacitors are limited (in energy
density) to what we have today.

I am TELLING you that we could configure capacitors to hold energy density
close to that of coal and oil.
And we're telling you that you can't back up your assertion. It's a
dream. You might be right, you might be wrong. Either way you don't
have the knowledge to back up your assertion, so it's worthless.

What do you want to achieve by posting your dream of the future?


Tim
--
The .sig is dead.
 
feerguy9@cs.com (FEerguy9) wrote:
"FEerguy9" <feerguy9@cs.com> wrote in message
news:20040122052801.22897.00000606@mb-m04.news.cs.com...
Could it be that you simply have NO CLUE WHATSOEVER?

No. It is because you cut off the subject, you nitwit.

Cut off the subject? Frank, you HAVE NO subject - you
have a ridiculous pipe dream that has been shown, quite
clearly, and time and time again, to be utterly unworkable.
Until you could come back with some REASONS as to
why we should believe otherwise - something that you have
to date NEVER done - you can rightly expect to continue
to be laughed at.

I see.

The bottom line is that you all think that capacitors are limited (in energy
density) to what we have today.

I am TELLING you that we could configure capacitors to hold energy density
close to that of coal and oil.

And we're telling you that you can't back up your assertion.
Very true.


It's a dream. You might be right, you might be wrong. Either way you don't
have the knowledge to back up your assertion, so it's worthless.
I am making a suggestion.

I am making a suggestion to all the energy people in here - who seem to have
missed this possibility.


What do you want to achieve by posting your dream of the future?
I just like to irritate people.

I'm just mean.


Frank
 
"FEerguy9" <feerguy9@cs.com> wrote in message
news:20040124012752.24678.00000707@mb-m16.news.cs.com...
The bottom line is that you all think that capacitors are limited (in
energy
density) to what we have today.

I am TELLING you that we could configure capacitors to hold energy density
close to that of coal and oil.
Yes, you keep CLAIMING that, but then you offer absolutely
ZERO reasoning, evidence, or logically-produced theory showing
why anyone should believe this would be so. All you EVER give
is nothing more than wishful thinking on your part - basically, "gee,
it sure would be nice if things worked THIS way!"

The problem is, things DON'T work that way. You simply don't
know what you're talking about at all.

Bob M.
 
"FEerguy9" <feerguy9@cs.com> wrote in message
news:20040124094901.13174.00000362@mb-m20.news.cs.com...
I am making a suggestion.

I am making a suggestion to all the energy people in here - who seem to
have
missed this possibility.
And what you don't realize is that this "suggestion" of yours
is hardly original - it was considered and eliminated from
consideration a LONG time ago, for reasons that you either
fail to comprehend or simply ignore. Every bit of knowledge,
evidence, and theory ever accumulated on this subject, by
people who DO know what they are doing, is against you.
Yet you continue to pretend that you've come up with something
that has been "missed", something new. This is the essence of
a crackpot position. You apparently are too ignorant to even
realize how ignorant you are.



I just like to irritate people.

I'm just mean.
No, you're just ignorant. You have no idea what you're
talking about, and either are unwilling or unable to correct
this.

Bob M.
 
"Bob Myers" <nospamplease@addressinvalid.com> wrote in message news:<40155f12$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com>...
"FEerguy9" <feerguy9@cs.com> wrote in message
news:20040124012752.24678.00000707@mb-m16.news.cs.com...

The bottom line is that you all think that capacitors are limited (in
energy
density) to what we have today.

I am TELLING you that we could configure capacitors to hold energy density
close to that of coal and oil.

Yes, you keep CLAIMING that, but then you offer absolutely
ZERO reasoning, evidence, or logically-produced theory showing
why anyone should believe this would be so. All you EVER give
is nothing more than wishful thinking on your part - basically, "gee,
it sure would be nice if things worked THIS way!"

The problem is, things DON'T work that way. You simply don't
know what you're talking about at all.

Bob M.
Frank's reasoning goes back to the basic eer theorem of L=C
where L is a lump of coal, and C is a capacitor of the same size.
Both the capacitor and the coal hold energy in the same size
package, therefore they must be equal. The only missing detail
is a method of building a capacitor so it behaves like coal.
Well, there are other minor details of gathering energy from
renewable sources to charge the capacitor, but that's the easy
part. We simply build a solar farm the size of Tennessee.

How much clearer can it be?

-Bill
 
"Bill Bowden" <wrongaddress@att.net> wrote in message
news:ad025737.0401271814.116d811c@posting.google.com...
"Bob Myers" <nospamplease@addressinvalid.com> wrote in message
news:<40155f12$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com>...
"FEerguy9" <feerguy9@cs.com> wrote in message
news:20040124012752.24678.00000707@mb-m16.news.cs.com...

The bottom line is that you all think that capacitors are limited (in
energy
density) to what we have today.

I am TELLING you that we could configure capacitors to hold energy
density
close to that of coal and oil.

Yes, you keep CLAIMING that, but then you offer absolutely
ZERO reasoning, evidence, or logically-produced theory showing
why anyone should believe this would be so. All you EVER give
is nothing more than wishful thinking on your part - basically, "gee,
it sure would be nice if things worked THIS way!"

The problem is, things DON'T work that way. You simply don't
know what you're talking about at all.

Bob M.

Frank's reasoning goes back to the basic eer theorem of L=C
where L is a lump of coal, and C is a capacitor of the same size.
Both the capacitor and the coal hold energy in the same size
package, therefore they must be equal. The only missing detail
is a method of building a capacitor so it behaves like coal.
Well, there are other minor details of gathering energy from
renewable sources to charge the capacitor, but that's the easy
part. We simply build a solar farm the size of Tennessee.

How much clearer can it be?

-Bill
No, Frank's reasoning is that if he keeps babbling until the medication
kicks in, he won't worry about when the white-coats might come.

Ken
 
"FEerguy9" <feerguy9@cs.com> wrote in message
news:20040124094901.13174.00000362@mb-m20.news.cs.com...
I am making a suggestion.

I am making a suggestion to all the energy people in here - who seem to
have
missed this possibility.

And what you don't realize is that this "suggestion" of yours
is hardly original - it was considered and eliminated from
consideration a LONG time ago,
Now, THAT is interesting.

First, I would like to SEE such a consideration.

Second, what do you mean by a "LONG time ago"? Was it before we had the
selection of renewable sources now available?


for reasons that you either
fail to comprehend or simply ignore.
Some of both.


Every bit of knowledge,
evidence, and theory ever accumulated on this subject, by
people who DO know what they are doing, is against you.
Then, what is Maxwell Technologies doing with the Cache deal?

Hmmmm?


Yet you continue to pretend that you've come up with something
that has been "missed", something new. This is the essence of
a crackpot position. You apparently are too ignorant to even
realize how ignorant you are.
Some truth in that, I suppose.



I just like to irritate people.

I'm just mean.

No, you're just ignorant. You have no idea what you're talking about, and
either are unwilling or unable to correct this.

Unwilling.


Frank
 

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top