Re: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

[Jed Rothwell]

 wrote:

Regarding Robin’s observation, cardiologists may not like such a long life
> device since it would reduce the market supply of people needing periodic
> operations.
>

No, no, no, NO! Never. Implanting a pacemaker or changing one out is a
serious operation. It usually works okay, but no ethical doctor would want
to do it just for the money. Cardiologists do not like to kill or disable
patients. This is like suggesting that a doctor would deliberately infect
someone to extend a hospital stay, or cause a difficult birth that required
a Cesarean.

(No doubt there are a few criminally unethical doctors who do things like
that.)

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

[Jed Rothwell]

It is a shame you cannot easily recharge batteries in the body. Heart
Venticular Assist Devices (VAD) are all powered by a physical connection to
the outside of the body. I suppose that must be a awkward, and a source of
infection. See:

http://www.mylvad.com/content/what-lvad-how-does-it-work

http://www.heartware.com/sites/default/files/uploads/docs/ifu1_rev_15.pdf

Of course these things take much more power than a pacemaker.

Artificial hearts have not be successful, but VAD are similar and they are
effective. In some cases, VAD have apparently helped the patients' hearts
recover and improve their function, I guess by reducing the burden of work.

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

[bobcook39923]

Higgins is correct IMHO.  The heart battery charger should utilize existing  or 
slightly modified NMR machines to focus an oscillating magnetic field on an 
internal permanent magnet oscillator which can move within a conductor and 
create an internal source of current.  Forget about using RF penetrating EM 
radiation.  

Regarding Robin’s observation, cardiologists may not like such a long life 
device since it would reduce the market supply of people needing periodic 
operations.  Opposing this rationale I have heard the idea that getting inside 
the chest and checking the equipment out results in more reliable performance.

The same argument (get inside to check things out ½ way through reactor life)  
was used for naval nuclear reactors early on.  I just read recently that the 
Navy brass is changing that design philosophy to produce reactors that will go 
the life of a ship—40-50 years—after nearly 65 years of reactor design and 
operating experience.   I doubt that the rest of the ship will last that long 
without overhaul or al least major changes in weapons.  
   
I think that the old design advice, “if the wheel works don’t fix it,” is 
probably ok for naval reactor design.

As to David’s comments about nuclear waste, I agree that the expense is high 
and the safety of storage is high and the safety is unconsciously poor in many 
cases.  The best solution IMHO is storage in Yucca Mountain in self-shielded 
ductile iron casks of about 100 tons that will fit on special rail cars for 
transport to Yucca Mt.  

As LENR gets a foot hold in the world’s energy production, those old die-hards, 
who want the eventual use of Pu-239 and other hard to handle isotopes, will be 
gone.   Yucca Mountain can be closed up along with the other nuclear test holes 
and mountain test sites nearby.  The one problem with this solution is that 
intrusion by future non-technical people would be easy, if institutional 
government controls fail in the future.  However,  this issue is no different 
than the same institutional control problem associated with hazardous waste 
disposal sites containing heavy metals and organic waste, both a major concern 
to health and safety of future, non-technical generations and the environment.

Bob Cook
.   

From: Bob Higgins
Sent: Thursday, December 1, 2016 6:40 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

This is possible, but it would require a close coupling via low frequency 
magnetic fields.  Think of it as a hockey puck placed over the pacemaker 
implant area for a period of hours.  The human body is well modeled as a 
container of salt water.  In fact, when we were creating RF models of the human 
body, the dummy was nicknamed, "Salty".  The water is a highly ionic, highly 
conductive, high dielectric (Er~80) fluid.  This causes a skin impedance that 
is highly reflective of RF - most of the EM fields are substantially reflected. 
 Magnetic fields will penetrate, but propagating EM fields have a fixed ratio 
of electric/magnetic field intensity given by the free space impedance of 277 
ohms.  Near field evanescent fields close to the source may have a different 
ratio, allowing the magnetic field intensity to be higher which will penetrate 
into the body (the hockey puck radiator).
Most of the local AC fields are E-fields and these are highly reflected by the 
body's conductive nature and do not penetrate.

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 7:11 PM, <mix...@bigpond.com> wrote:
In reply to  Bob Higgins's message of Tue, 29 Nov 2016 10:41:32 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
I have often wondered why pacemakers can't have a built in transformer secondary
and rectifier so that all one has to do a be adjacent to the primary for a while
in order to recharge the internal battery ("air" core transformer). Perhaps they
could even be powered by the stray AC fields in your average dwelling?
[snip]
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

Re: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

[Bob Higgins]

This is possible, but it would require a close coupling via low frequency
magnetic fields.  Think of it as a hockey puck placed over the pacemaker
implant area for a period of hours.  The human body is well modeled as a
container of salt water.  In fact, when we were creating RF models of the
human body, the dummy was nicknamed, "Salty".  The water is a highly ionic,
highly conductive, high dielectric (Er~80) fluid.  This causes a skin
impedance that is highly reflective of RF - most of the EM fields are
substantially reflected.  Magnetic fields will penetrate, but propagating
EM fields have a fixed ratio of electric/magnetic field intensity given by
the free space impedance of 277 ohms.  Near field evanescent fields close
to the source may have a different ratio, allowing the magnetic field
intensity to be higher which will penetrate into the body (the hockey puck
radiator).

Most of the local AC fields are E-fields and these are highly reflected by
the body's conductive nature and do not penetrate.

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 7:11 PM,  wrote:

> In reply to  Bob Higgins's message of Tue, 29 Nov 2016 10:41:32 -0700:
> Hi,
> [snip]
> I have often wondered why pacemakers can't have a built in transformer
> secondary
> and rectifier so that all one has to do a be adjacent to the primary for a
> while
> in order to recharge the internal battery ("air" core transformer).
> Perhaps they
> could even be powered by the stray AC fields in your average dwelling?
> [snip]
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

[mixent]

In reply to  Bob Higgins's message of Tue, 29 Nov 2016 10:41:32 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
>I know how industrial diamond and DLC are made and the rates that are
>reasonable.  I don't know where the 4mW/g electrical came from for 14C
>(perhaps that is the energy output of the 14C), 

Yes, that's one reason I said "maximum". It would also slowly decrease over the
lifetime of the C14, but that's not really a problem for any practical
application.

>but I believe you would be
>doing well to achieve about 40 microwatts per gram.  

I think that would depend on the exact construction, and since I have no idea
how this is supposed to work, I shouldn't really comment, but an efficiency of
only 1% intuitively seems a bit conservative. ;)
E.g. I could envision using doped diamond to reduce the resistance, and many
very thin junctions in series, to make use of remaining energy of fast electrons
as they pass through multiple junctions. (Assuming they even use junctions.)

>Keep in mind that a
>gram of diamond is 5 carats of diamond.  It is not practical to produce
>diamond from 14C from high temperature - high pressure methods because of
>the leaked non-diamond 14C and because the result would not be
>encapsulated.  If this were being produced in gas phase (RF plasma), you
>would contaminate the whole vacuum system with C14, and you would have to
>capture everything when you pumped the chamber down (could not be vented to
>atmosphere).  Vacuum pump would be contaminated, the vacuum oil would be
>contaminated.

I agree, lot's of potential problems.
>
>Zinc-air hearing aid batteries produce more than 1mW and the newer digital
>hearing aids need more than 10mW peaks.  Zinc-air hearing aid batteries are
>cheap, so this is a non-application.  Pacemaker is an appropriate
>application, but the problem is not enough power from the 14C beta
>battery.  Spacecraft clock core is a good application, but would not be
>worth the development for such a small market.

I have often wondered why pacemakers can't have a built in transformer secondary
and rectifier so that all one has to do a be adjacent to the primary for a while
in order to recharge the internal battery ("air" core transformer). Perhaps they
could even be powered by the stray AC fields in your average dwelling?
[snip]
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

Re: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

[Jed Rothwell]

The most clever scheme for powering pacemakers I have heard of is to power
them with oxygen and carbon from the bloodstream. Like small, artificial
organs. I do not know where that project is but it seems like a neat idea.
The power lasts as long as the person does.

There are some other schemes to scavenge a little power from the body:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3146093/

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

[David Roberson]

OK, so it behaves more like a photoelectric cell. I was under the impression 
that it was supposed to be highly efficient in converting the beta energy into 
electricity. If it is very inefficient then a lot of heat is going to have to 
be exhausted. That is a significant disadvantage when compared to a battery if 
I recall correctly.

I suppose that the fact that the energy is virtually free and long lasting is 
its main thrust. This makes me wonder what could be done with concentrated 
highly radioactive waste being allowed to just generate useful heat. The heat 
concentration would be far, far lower than that produced by a reactor, but 
perhaps some new applications could be found. 

Of course the best solution is for all of the hazardous nuclear reactors to be 
replaced by LENR devices. And, hide that nasty waste forever in someone else's 
back yard!

I hate to say it, but it really looks like highly radioactive nuclear reactors 
need to go away along with all of the waste that is accumulating. It is not 
clear that a really good use for the spent fuel is going to justify its cost, 
etc. especially when LENR comes into wide usage.

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Tue, Nov 29, 2016 3:17 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries



Actually, the output voltage is the voltage of the semiconductor junction.  The 
beta particle stimulates multiple hole-electron pairs across this junction.  
This type of beta voltaic battery is extremely inefficient in converting the 
energy in the beta particles into output electrical energy.



On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 12:13 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote:

Much depends upon the terminal voltage that you must convert into a useful 
value. My suspicion is that the open circuited voltage is very high, making it 
difficult to use in simple applications.
Dave

 

 
-Original Message-
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Tue, Nov 29, 2016 10:37 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries




<mix...@bigpond.com> wrote:



The maximum power output of such a battery would be about 4 mW / gm of C14.
(That's milli-watt, not Megawatt, which means you would be looking at a very low
acceleration rate.



A hearing aid battery produces less than 1 mW. A pacemaker produces about 10 
mW. So ~4 mW power levels would be useful. You could use 3 g of diamonds in a 
pacemaker.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

[Bob Higgins]

Actually, the output voltage is the voltage of the semiconductor junction.
The beta particle stimulates multiple hole-electron pairs across this
junction.  This type of beta voltaic battery is extremely inefficient in
converting the energy in the beta particles into output electrical energy.

On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 12:13 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote:

> Much depends upon the terminal voltage that you must convert into a
> useful value. My suspicion is that the open circuited voltage is very high,
> making it difficult to use in simple applications.
> Dave
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com>
> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
> Sent: Tue, Nov 29, 2016 10:37 am
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear
> batteries
>
> <mix...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>
> The maximum power output of such a battery would be about 4 mW / gm of C14.
>> (That's milli-watt, not Megawatt, which means you would be looking at a
>> very low
>> acceleration rate.
>>
>
> A hearing aid battery produces less than 1 mW. A pacemaker produces about
> 10 mW. So ~4 mW power levels would be useful. You could use 3 g of diamonds
> in a pacemaker.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

[Jed Rothwell]

David Roberson  wrote:


> Of course, if it costs a fortune to manufacture that would not be true.
>

Synthetic diamonds for industrial apps are fairly cheap. The gem quality
ones cost $6,000 per carat (0.2 g) which is a lot. I do not know which you
would need. However, medical use batteries are ultra-high end products.
Hearing aid batteries cost about $80 per year. Pacemakers are mainly
battery, and they cost ~$6,000.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

[David Roberson]

Much depends upon the terminal voltage that you must convert into a useful 
value. My suspicion is that the open circuited voltage is very high, making it 
difficult to use in simple applications.
Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Tue, Nov 29, 2016 10:37 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries




<mix...@bigpond.com> wrote:



The maximum power output of such a battery would be about 4 mW / gm of C14.
(That's milli-watt, not Megawatt, which means you would be looking at a very low
acceleration rate.



A hearing aid battery produces less than 1 mW. A pacemaker produces about 10 
mW. So ~4 mW power levels would be useful. You could use 3 g of diamonds in a 
pacemaker.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

[David Roberson]

If Brown were able to get large currents at a modest voltage, he would be onto 
a very valuable produce. Of course, if it costs a fortune to manufacture that 
would not be true.

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Chris Zell <chrisz...@wetmtv.com>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Mon, Nov 28, 2016 3:09 pm
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries



And what was the story on Paul Brown?  He claimed huge currents, not just 
microamps from his devices.
 
Do we call him a fraud and move on? Or was he onto something big?
 

From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 2:44 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

 

This is really just the natural progression of betavoltaics, incorporating 
"nano".

 

The niche has been around for many years as it is almost obvious... remember 
Paul Brown and before?... Several of those betavoltaic proponents used to post 
here (Brown passed away in 2001). The tech was always just out of reach in 
terms of cost and energy density.

 

Nano-diamond changes everything. Its low work function means high efficiency 
and cold cathodes. The problem will always be cost but mass production of the 
material for micro-electronics could change that. Intel needs a new 
breakthrough.

 

Where are you Intel? We need you.

 



On Monday, November 28, 2016 11:17 AM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> 
wrote:

 


That's fantastic. If it works, it will be as good as cold fusion for small 
scale devices such as hearing aids. I wonder if it can be powerful enough for a 
cell phone?

- Jed

 



 

Re: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

[David Roberson]

I did not see a reference to the open circuit voltage or short circuit current 
obtained during these tests. Has anyone found a reference? Also, where are the 
electrical terminals?

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Jack Cole <jcol...@gmail.com>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Mon, Nov 28, 2016 11:11 am
Subject: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries



Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries
http://flip.it/dKKukF

Re: FW: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

[Jed Rothwell]

 wrote:


> The device being made from by-produce materials from reactor ops would be
> subject to regulation by the NRC.
>

This should not be a problem. It would be like a smoke detector with Am-241.

FW: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

[bobcook39923]

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

From: bobcook39...@gmail.com
Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 2:37 PM
To: Brian Ahern
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

Each nano diamond would have a small resistance from the beta generation 
locations to the surface of the particle.  Disperse the diamond powder in a 
copper lattice, pressure bond, and, bingo, you have a low resistance source of 
electrons.   The mean free path of a C-14 beat is probably mico-meters compared 
to nano-meters for the diamond particles.  The beta (charge) would be captured 
in the copper.  Put a diode on one end of the copper and you may get a nice 
battery. 

The device being made from by-produce materials from reactor ops would be 
subject to regulation by the NRC.

Bob Cook

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

From: Brian Ahern
Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 2:17 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; Jones Beene
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

Not so fast!  The kow work function is great for cold cathode emission. However 
the very high reesistivity prevents useful operation.


From: Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net>
Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 2:43 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries 
 
This is really just the natural progression of betavoltaics, incorporating 
"nano". 

The niche has been around for many years as it is almost obvious... remember 
Paul Brown and before?... Several of those betavoltaic proponents used to post 
here (Brown passed away in 2001). The tech was always just out of reach in 
terms of cost and energy density.

Nano-diamond changes everything. Its low work function means high efficiency 
and cold cathodes. The problem will always be cost but mass production of the 
material for micro-electronics could change that. Intel needs a new 
breakthrough.

Where are you Intel? We need you.

On Monday, November 28, 2016 11:17 AM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> 
wrote:

That's fantastic. If it works, it will be as good as cold fusion for small 
scale devices such as hearing aids. I wonder if it can be powerful enough for a 
cell phone?

- Jed 

[Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

[Bob Higgins]

I know how industrial diamond and DLC are made and the rates that are
reasonable.  I don't know where the 4mW/g electrical came from for 14C
(perhaps that is the energy output of the 14C), but I believe you would be
doing well to achieve about 40 microwatts per gram.  Keep in mind that a
gram of diamond is 5 carats of diamond.  It is not practical to produce
diamond from 14C from high temperature - high pressure methods because of
the leaked non-diamond 14C and because the result would not be
encapsulated.  If this were being produced in gas phase (RF plasma), you
would contaminate the whole vacuum system with C14, and you would have to
capture everything when you pumped the chamber down (could not be vented to
atmosphere).  Vacuum pump would be contaminated, the vacuum oil would be
contaminated.

Zinc-air hearing aid batteries produce more than 1mW and the newer digital
hearing aids need more than 10mW peaks.  Zinc-air hearing aid batteries are
cheap, so this is a non-application.  Pacemaker is an appropriate
application, but the problem is not enough power from the 14C beta
battery.  Spacecraft clock core is a good application, but would not be
worth the development for such a small market.

One also has to consider that 14C is a tremendously bio-active element and
you are talking about curies/battery (not microCi).  This is basically a
non-starter.

Bob Higgins

On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

>  wrote:
>
> The maximum power output of such a battery would be about 4 mW / gm of C14.
>> (That's milli-watt, not Megawatt, which means you would be looking at a
>> very low
>> acceleration rate.
>>
>
> A hearing aid battery produces less than 1 mW. A pacemaker produces about
> 10 mW. So ~4 mW power levels would be useful. You could use 3 g of diamonds
> in a pacemaker.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

[Jed Rothwell]

 wrote:

The maximum power output of such a battery would be about 4 mW / gm of C14.
> (That's milli-watt, not Megawatt, which means you would be looking at a
> very low
> acceleration rate.
>

A hearing aid battery produces less than 1 mW. A pacemaker produces about
10 mW. So ~4 mW power levels would be useful. You could use 3 g of diamonds
in a pacemaker.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

[mixent]

In reply to  Jack Cole's message of Mon, 28 Nov 2016 17:39:59 +:
Hi,
[snip]
>Interesting association to the EM drive.  Maybe it would produce
>reactionless thrust also?
>
>Assuming the EM drive actually works, this would be an ideal application
>for this kind of nuclear battery.  I am assuming this would be a very
>expensive manufacturing process, but a battery working for 5000+ years and
>a working EM drive would make for quite a nice space exploration probe.  It
>would make interstellar probes feasible.

The maximum power output of such a battery would be about 4 mW / gm of C14.
(That's milli-watt, not Megawatt, which means you would be looking at a very low
acceleration rate.
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

Re: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

[Brian Ahern]

Not so fast!  The kow work function is great for cold cathode emission. However 
the very high reesistivity prevents useful operation.



From: Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net>
Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 2:43 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

This is really just the natural progression of betavoltaics, incorporating 
"nano".

The niche has been around for many years as it is almost obvious... remember 
Paul Brown and before?... Several of those betavoltaic proponents used to post 
here (Brown passed away in 2001). The tech was always just out of reach in 
terms of cost and energy density.

Nano-diamond changes everything. Its low work function means high efficiency 
and cold cathodes. The problem will always be cost but mass production of the 
material for micro-electronics could change that. Intel needs a new 
breakthrough.

Where are you Intel? We need you.


On Monday, November 28, 2016 11:17 AM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> 
wrote:


That's fantastic. If it works, it will be as good as cold fusion for small 
scale devices such as hearing aids. I wonder if it can be powerful enough for a 
cell phone?

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

[Chris Zell]

And what was the story on Paul Brown?  He claimed huge currents, not just 
microamps from his devices.

Do we call him a fraud and move on? Or was he onto something big?

From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 2:44 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

This is really just the natural progression of betavoltaics, incorporating 
"nano".

The niche has been around for many years as it is almost obvious... remember 
Paul Brown and before?... Several of those betavoltaic proponents used to post 
here (Brown passed away in 2001). The tech was always just out of reach in 
terms of cost and energy density.

Nano-diamond changes everything. Its low work function means high efficiency 
and cold cathodes. The problem will always be cost but mass production of the 
material for micro-electronics could change that. Intel needs a new 
breakthrough.

Where are you Intel? We need you.

On Monday, November 28, 2016 11:17 AM, Jed Rothwell 
<jedrothw...@gmail.com<mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com>> wrote:

That's fantastic. If it works, it will be as good as cold fusion for small 
scale devices such as hearing aids. I wonder if it can be powerful enough for a 
cell phone?

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

[Jones Beene]

This is really just the natural progression of betavoltaics, incorporating 
"nano". 

The niche has been around for many years as it is almost obvious... remember 
Paul Brown and before?... Several of those betavoltaic proponents used to post 
here (Brown passed away in 2001). The tech was always just out of reach in 
terms of cost and energy density.

Nano-diamond changes everything. Its low work function means high efficiency 
and cold cathodes. The problem will always be cost but mass production of the 
material for micro-electronics could change that. Intel needs a new 
breakthrough.
Where are you Intel? We need you.
 

On Monday, November 28, 2016 11:17 AM, Jed Rothwell  
wrote:
 
 

 That's fantastic. If it works, it will be as good as cold fusion for small 
scale devices such as hearing aids. I wonder if it can be powerful enough for a 
cell phone?

- Jed


 
   

Re: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

[Jed Rothwell]

That's fantastic. If it works, it will be as good as cold fusion for small
scale devices such as hearing aids. I wonder if it can be powerful enough
for a cell phone?

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

[Jack Cole]

Interesting association to the EM drive.  Maybe it would produce
reactionless thrust also?

Assuming the EM drive actually works, this would be an ideal application
for this kind of nuclear battery.  I am assuming this would be a very
expensive manufacturing process, but a battery working for 5000+ years and
a working EM drive would make for quite a nice space exploration probe.  It
would make interstellar probes feasible.

On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 11:08 AM Jones Beene  wrote:

> The radioactive carbon diamond is probably acting as a diode, making it a
> self-powered diode. The beta emission would be similar to high voltage. It
> is a good bet that the physical shape must be tapered and brings to mind
> the Shawyer cavity.
>
> Schottky diodes made of artificial diamond are known to have extreme
> breakdown voltages >6 kV which is many times greater than semiconductor
> diodes.
>
>
> On Monday, November 28, 2016 8:11 AM, Jack Cole  wrote:
>
>
>
> Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries
> http://flip.it/dKKukF
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

[Jones Beene]

The radioactive carbon diamond is probably acting as a diode, making it a 
self-powered diode. The beta emission would be similar to high voltage. It is a 
good bet that the physical shape must be tapered and brings to mind the Shawyer 
cavity.

Schottky diodes made of artificial diamond are known to have extreme breakdown 
voltages >6 kV which is many times greater than semiconductor diodes. 

On Monday, November 28, 2016 8:11 AM, Jack Cole  wrote:
 
 

 Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batterieshttp://flip.it/dKKukF

 
   

[Vo]:Article: Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

[Jack Cole]

Diamonds turn nuclear waste into nuclear batteries

http://flip.it/dKKukF