Interesting research!
-------- Original Message --------
Here are just a couple of examples where anyone can obtain an abstract, but
will be asked for their membership ID or $$$$ for the full text -- many papers
available so if interested enough buy them:
1. The Journal of Physical Chemistry
http://lib.semi.ac.cn:8080/tsh/dzzy/wsqk/selected%20papers/Journal%20of%20Physical%20Chemistry%20B/110-16827.pdf
2. Nature
http://www.nature.com/nphys/journal/v1/n3/abs/nphys151.html
Here is a link to UC Davis where a related paper can be had for free:
http://leopard.physics.ucdavis.edu/rts/p298/Schaller.pdf
This 2005 paper is also an indication of how long work has been going on in the
Klimov Team in the area of the generation of multiple excitons.
Here is another free link to one of Klimov's presentations done back in 2006
from the Center for Nonlinear Studies:
http://cnls.lanl.gov/External/showtalksummary.php?selection=466
This talk is a good summary of what they were excited about in 2006. Goes into
some details with an example of the maxium theoretical possible number of
photogenerated excitons from a photon energy of 7.8 energy gaps based on energy
conservation being 7, and how their experiments then indicated they were
sometimes generating 7. This would meant 90% of the photon energy produced
multiple charges and only 10% was lost as heat. The point was made that in bulk
materials this same photon energy level only produced 1 exciton -- 90% of the
photon energy was lost as heat and only 10% produced a single exciton. Notice
the comment that 7 was the maxium possible based on energy conservation -- no
claim here of free energy.
This period seems to be the time the free energy sites made the jump that since
it had always been one photon in and one electron out in bulk material with
Klimov's nano-crystals generating 7 electrons all you had to do was use one
electron to create another photon, feed the photon back to the input, and use
the continuous supply of 6 additional electrons to do useful work. The problem
with this is the assumption that this one electron using only 1/7 of the output
of the nano-crystal could be used to generate a new photon with the same
wavelength -- photon energy varies with wavelength where shorter wave length
equals more energy -- as the initial photon. Stated another way any photon
generated would not have the photon energy of 7.8 energy gaps that the initial
photon coming from an external source required to generated 7 electrons.
The ScienceDailey site has a good free article on how the team went back
through their process after others reported they were unable to duplicate the
full expected results -- additional related articles here as well.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/02/090210125531.htm
The net of this 2009 article was on one hand they found they were counting some
false positives -- so they actually were not generating 7 excitons as they
thought in 2006, but on the other hand they were able to confirm without
question that while the newly measured electron yields were lower that carrier
multiplication was occurring and specifically the photon energy required to
generate an extra electron in a nano-crystal was about half that required for a
bulk material.
I'll shut-up now after adding other researchers and processes have shown
carrier multiplication and we should get excited about all of these efforts
because someday they will help lead to super-efficient solar cells, but none of
these researchers are claiming or expected to see free energy.
