Wonder if they would be interested in an AC super capacitor lol.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLOkV5qIOgs

Making graphene super-capacitors with a DVD writer.  Maybe you can use this technique to make your triphene super-caps.  It's actually a "non-polarized" or "bipolar" super-cap (see image below).  Too bad MarkE is in a time-out, Lol!

Gravock

There are way too many warning flags for this, some are from the claims, some are from comments made by posters:

- There is no such thing as getting power from the Earth's magnetic field.
- It would be impossible to power the device for 12 hours if you tried to collect energy from ambient electro-smog.
- The "power from exotic sources" argument is a dead duck.  If that was really true why would you make a flashlight of all things?
- The price is sky-high at $99.  For example, if you want to be negative and assume it's a fraud, and assume that the makers of this device are gambling that they can sell 10,000 units, then that's one million dollars.  If your costs are $10 to make it, that means you could make $900,000 profit on a device that is a fake.
- If it is a "free energy" flashlight, why does it apparently only last from two to five years?  Why should it "wear out?"
- A capacitor almost certainly could not power the flashlight for 12 hours and there is no such thing as a self charging capacitor.  I am intentionally ignoring the known phenomenon that happens with electrolytic capacitors.
- There is no such thing as "tapping into the Schumann resonance frequencies of the Earth."
- Complete and total nonsense from their own promotional material, "we must follow the flow of the electron neutrino which pierces the Earth's atmosphere in all directions."  There is no such thing as an "electron neutrino."  There is no possibility of extracting energy from regular neutrinos.
- Their promotional material discussion that starts with this, "The resulting lightning strikes pump energy into the earth-atmosphere cavity..." is complete nonsense.
- This comment makes no sense, "The Earth's magnetic field emits power estimated at around 2,6992139х10²⁴ watts."
- Just because they show some drawings of a train means absolutely nothing.  I am willing to bet if you do some real searching that you will find that this company has zero footprint in the multi-billion-dollar rail transportation industry.  Chances are the only thing they have done is pay an artist $500 to produce a painting of a train on an "uprail" track so they can pretend that they are involved in the rail industry.  I searched on "uprail" and it looks like it is a concept only and has never actually been deployed in the field.
- This comment makes no sense, "...is there is a capacitor being slowly trickle charged by maybe a crystal based electrolyte, making it somewhat being battery powered.  What the capacitor is made of is unknown. could a antenna be used to help recharge itself from the radiant earth energy?"
- When they talk about "accumulators" it really sounds like they are talking about batteries.  Why not just say batteries?
- They are Russian, and that should make you become very cautious.
- They don't feel real at all:  http://www.businessinternett.com/en/atlant/

I am not feeling it at all.  To me, they are in the same league as the Keppe fan group.

Thanks Gravrock,  I had not noticed that explanation.   That would be great if they have harnessed that kind of power although I suspect it would be expensive or difficult to get enough that way for powering something big.   LED efficiency has increased so much in the last 10 years that it doesn't take a lot of power for 120 Lumens of light.

They also say it can take 10-12 days to recharge when dead. It could likely be charged in less time with a small solar array in the handle.

thanx for the info.

it is a useful product. the developers deserve a successful future.
its not a cheap flashlight, though its price could soon lower with new versions.
without batteries, it must have capacitor based storage.
if it was a self charging battery, then it would be a capacitor.

Actually I have a lot of flashlights that are over $100 each.   But I mostly quit buying when I was up to around 80+ flashlights.   Some are one of a kind and I'm a collector.  If I hadn't just bought another this last week I'd probably have ordered this one but really trying to quit that addiction

Gravrock,  Jimboot, DreamThinkBuild - thanks for the additional info.   I just found this flashlight late last night and didn't have time to look deeper.  This sounds even better than I thought.   I didn't realize either they are talking about scaling it up.   Awesome news if it is for real.   I know other researchers have long talked about the power available from Earth lightning strikes and other similar sources.   It will be great if they really have a good (and affordable) way of tapping into that energy source.   


Note that Cree (LED manufacturer) has already broken the 300 Lumens per watt barrier.   This little light does 900 Lumens (U.S. Quarter next to it for size comparison) :

Below is a quote as found on Adgex's website on the Adgex accumulator.  It appears they're tapping into the Schumann resonance frequencies of the earth.

Gravock

And that's what makes me think it's a scam, because _as you  know_ very low frequencies generally require very large structures for efficient transmission/reception. The wavelengths of the Schumann resonance frequencies are very long indeed.

Today Schumann resonances are recorded at many separate research stations around the world. The sensors used to measure Schumann resonances typically consist of two horizontal magnetic inductive coils for measuring the north-south and east-west components of the magnetic field, and a vertical electric dipole antenna for measuring the vertical component of the electric field. A typical passband of the instruments is 3–100 Hz. The Schumann resonance electric field amplitude (~300 microvolts per meter) is much smaller than the static fair-weather electric field (~150 V/m) in the atmosphere. Similarly, the amplitude of the Schumann resonance magnetic field (~1 picotesla) is many orders of magnitude smaller than the Earth's magnetic field (~30–50 microteslas).^[21] Specialized receivers and antennas are needed to detect and record Schumann resonances. The electric component is commonly measured with a ball antenna, suggested by Ogawa et al., in 1966,^[22] connected to a high-impedance amplifier. The magnetic induction coils typically consist of tens- to hundreds-of-thousands of turns of wire wound around a core of very high magnetic permeability.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schumann_resonances

If they are really picking up significant energy from the SR in a handheld flashlight-sized object.... they are doing something very scientifically significant and important. So where are the peer-reviewed papers?

(Also note the mention of neutrinos in their literature.... red flags all around that bit.)

And that's what makes me think it's a scam, because _as you  know_ very low frequencies generally require very large structures for efficient transmission/reception. The wavelengths of the Schumann resonance frequencies are very long indeed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schumann_resonances

If they are really picking up significant energy from the SR in a handheld flashlight-sized object.... they are doing something very scientifically significant and important. So where are the peer-reviewed papers?

(Also note the mention of neutrinos in their literature.... red flags all around that bit.)

They are an unlisted Australian public company. Just read their investor pres from a year ago. My reading of suggests they were going to back door list by acquiring a small mining stock. This is not uncommon here, however it looks like that didn't happen. Still find it odd they would choose Australia to setup in. May have to buy one of those torches and send it to one of you brainiacs.




The other thing that is unusual is there is no 70+ Aussie white male on their board. Unlikely to get institutional investors without out imho

If you were paying attention, then you would have noticed at the bottom of the image it says, "* the pre-defined luminous efficacy are the typical/average values", for that particular light source selected.

Gravock

For certain (obsolete) values of "typical/average".
If you were building a "free energy" flashlight, would you select an inefficient LED? If you were paying attention, you might have read the LED data sheet I attached to my post. Those LEDs cost about 65 cents US singly and a lot less when ordered in quantity.