Hi Robin, --- Robin van Spaandonk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In reply to Paul's message of Mon, 9 Oct 2006 > 14:22:13 -0700 > (PDT): > Hi Paul, > [snip] > >I apologize. In a nutshell the design collects MCE > >(Magnetocaloric effect) energy. When the intrinsic > >electron spins flip the entire atom precesses as it > >rotates. This rotation/flip gives off radiation, > >typically in the hundreds of MHz. Unless using > >specific techniques, the magnetic material absorbs > >nearly all of this internal radiation. > [snip] > Ah, the penny drops! :) > So essentially you are converting random thermal > energy into > coherent microwave energy by forcing all the atoms > to release > their energy at one time. Then they absorb more > thermal energy, > and you convert it to microwaves again. > I like the concept.
That's basically the idea. The broadband UHF radiation varies from material to material. The peak wavelength of such radiation is considerably lower for electrically conductive materials such as iron for obvious reasons. Under normal core usages the radiation is incoherent, but if you magnetically flip all the spins at relatively the same time you then have a coherent pulse; i.e., tons of potential energy. Note that in such a case a great deal of the energy is not absorbed by the material because it's in a state of flipping to saturation. > You mention small domains as being > advantageous. Could this be attained by reducing the > density of > the active atoms? IOW could you simply use a > compound that is > essentially an insulator, with say only one active > atom among ten > "insulator atoms"? That would appear to result in > domains > comprising single atoms. That's an interesting idea. It should work. It would probably decrease the materials saturation and permeability. Your idea is somewhat similar to nanocrystalline material. One of your ferromagnetic atoms surround by insulation could be single crystal. A single nanocrystalline material is one large ferromagnetic crystal. Well, large as in a dozen or more atoms in diameter. > The disadvantage is that it would be a bit bulkier, > but perhaps > lots more efficient, and the insulator is hardly > going to bother > the microwaves, which should easily pass through and > can be > collected externally. Apparently Metglas makes a > whole variety of > products > (http://metglas.com/products/page5_1_2.htm), did you > have > any particular one in mind? (And do any of them meet > the > description I just gave)? I like 2714A with permeability of 1 million except it has low saturation. I tried to get a 2714A sample, but they referred me to similar material that had permeability of just 72,000. My second pick would be 2605SA1, which is the material Naudin used. Also 2705M and 2605CO look promising. Has anyone ever succeeded in receiving a sample from metglass? > > BTW you may find this interesting too. It's an email > I posted to > Vortex back in 1998:- > From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Jul 12 > 23:18:24 1998 > Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) > by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA06237; > Sun, 12 Jul 1998 23:10:34 -0700 > Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1998 23:10:34 -0700 > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Robin van > Spaandonk) > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Entropy? > Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1998 06:10:46 GMT > Organization: Improving > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451 > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Resent-Message-ID: <"zPITC.0.IX1.QJQgr"@mx1> > Resent-From: [email protected] > Reply-To: [email protected] > X-Mailing-List: <[email protected]> > archive/latest/20552 > X-Loop: [email protected] > Precedence: list > Resent-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Status: O > X-Status: > > On Sun, 12 Jul 1998 11:05:30 -0700, Ross Tessien > wrote: > [snip] > >The loss is because you will only have coupled some > of the low grade energy > >back into high grade. The balance is lost to > "heat", ie background thermal > >energy. > > The point I was trying to make, was based on the > concept of *only* > producing radio waves, without any background > thermal energy. The > concept being that in theory at least, I can do work > while > converting > heat into radio waves, because radio waves are > longer than heat > waves. > Practically, this could perhaps be done out in deep > space (or the > dark > side of the moon etc.) where a heat engine could > attain close to > 100% > efficiency, by radiating energy away at the > temperature of the > microwave background (i.e. 2.7 K). However because > the radiated > energy > is in the form of microwaves, almost all of it can > be recaptured > and > reused. IOW almost all of the energy can be used > twice, iso once, > and > then most of that can be used again, etc. If you add > up all the > partial re-uses of the same energy, before you > finally lose > everything, you have done much more work with the > initial amount > of > energy than is normally taken into account when > calculating the > increase in entropy (which basically assumes that > you lose the > energy > after one pass - see Carnot efficiency). (This is > also a concept > that > Tom Bearden pushes). > So if I have a microwave capture and conversion > efficiency of 80% > (is > this a reasonable number?), then in total, I can do > 1/1-.8 = 5 > joules > of work with only one joule of energy. > The reason this is currently seen as so outlandish, > is that we are > used to thinking in terms of energy dissipation and > loss. We think > in > these terms, because we usually "give up" on > recovering energy > when it > reaches the thermal stage. We see "low grade" > thermal energy as > useless and throw it away. But looked at from the > point of > wavelength, > it is actually "higher grade" than radio waves. Yet > we are able to > gather and "upgrade" radio waves, into energy of > almost any grade, > by > means of electric conversion. > The *only* reason that heat is seen as low grade, is > that we don't > have a "heat diode". (Well actually we do, they're > called solar > cells, > but these are only about 25% efficient at best). > What we really need, is a substance that is a strong > radio-emitter > when heated (or even just warmed :). Something that > might serve > the > purpose, would be a gas with long molecules, that > has ions stuck > at > the ends. If the molecules are long enough, and able > to move > freely, > then when the plastic is immersed in a magnetic > field, thermal > motion > will agitate the end ions, causing them to > accelerate in the > magnetic > field, and radiate radio waves. > Such a substance would absorb heat energy from the > environment, > and > convert it into longer wavelength radio waves that > we could then > rectify and turn into electric current. As far as > conventional > entropy > calculations are concerned this material would be > down-converting > radiant energy, so it would be seen as an increase > in entropy. > > > >So Entropy works. If you think entropy failed in > some well understood > >process, see the first comment. If you think > entropy failed in some ou > >experiment, see the first comment again and go > looking for where the extra > >energy came from in the experiment. > The bottom line as far as I am concerned, is that > the ability to > rectify a wave, results in negative entropy, i.e. it > gives us the > ability to convert random motion into directed > motion. > Our second "law" was written at a time when energy, > once > "randomised" > could not be recovered. That may now be changing. > > Ok, having now made abundantly clear for all the > world to see, > that I > haven't really a clue what entropy really is, I will > leave it to > the > rest of you to put me straight. :-) > PS Don't worry Ross, your discourse was not wasted > on me, but I > want > to see where this leads before "surrendering". > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk That's very nice! It reminds me of my other design based on T-rays -> http://www.emwiki.info/T-ray_Energy_Mover_Intro It's based on the fact that an ultra thin 1 square meter sheet radiates ~900 watts of T-rays. I have foolproof design that will generate several hundred watts in the form of a hot and cold plate per square meter. So you could stack hundreds of these per meter high and achieve vast amounts of energy. The only problem is what do you do with the heat & cold besides air conditioning and heating? The PowerChip will supposedly be on the market next year, which could efficiently convert this into electricity. The design is not yet published because I would have to spend some time searching for the appropriate materials. It requires two materials that have highly different refractive indexes between ~ 10 THz to 50 THz. I know glass and germanium would work, but germanium is relatively transparent at those frequencies. Therefore the germanium plate would have to be very thick, but that would be ridiculously expensive. Sterling's lawyer friend recommended that I not publish the design until I know the materials. You mention the second law of thermodynamics might be changing. I would have to agree, but the physics community will probably just append to its description rather than admit error. Are you familiar with the Dew Point experiment? http://www.emwiki.info/T-ray_Energy_Mover_Dew_Point_Exp Have you thought of a process to convert thermal to radio waves? Regards, Paul Lowrance __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
