Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: Ultracaps tested for excess energy  (Read 209765 times)

MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Ultracaps tested for excess energy
« Reply #60 on: December 03, 2009, 04:43:42 AM »
Paul:

My impression is that the capacitance is affected by the voltage much more than the temperature.  When you did your tests I am assuming that the cap temperature was more or less constant but the voltage was changing.  Certainly there may be an effect from temperature, I am not doubting this, but I guess that it would be at least two orders of magnitude lower than the effects from voltage.  Perhaps you will be doing more tests where you vary the temperature and then you can look at the data.

If I am right, it would be nice to see you come back and post a small acknowledgment that I was right.  I am truly trying to help you with some ideas and suggestions.

"Closed mindedness" is a relative thing Paul.  It can just as easily be argued that learning how capacitors actually work first before you speculate on their behaviour would be the first thing that you should do.  I mean "you" in a general sense here.  For sure there are people here that are "open minded" about capacitors that don't understand how they work.  So they are making speculations from a position of relative ignorance.  I would argue that it's those people that are the closed minded ones.  Opening your mind requires that you be prepared to learn.  Once you learn enough about car engines, you know that you can't put diesel fuel in a gasoline engine and you know that it is futile to do so.

What I don't want is to be bashed or harassed for expressing my thoughts around here.  Not only for this thread but in a general sense.  I know that you tend to stay out of the fray and this statement is not directed at you.

MileHigh

PaulLowrance

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2483
    • Global Free Energy
Re: Ultracaps tested for excess energy
« Reply #61 on: December 03, 2009, 05:01:23 AM »
Paul:

My impression is that the capacitance is affected by the voltage much more than the temperature.  When you did your tests I am assuming that the cap temperature was more or less constant but the voltage was changing.  Certainly there may be an effect from temperature, I am not doubting this, but I guess that it would be at least two orders of magnitude lower than the effects from voltage.  Perhaps you will be doing more tests where you vary the temperature and then you can look at the data.

I already gave you the measurements that disproved it's the main effect. It's your right to ignore data.



"Closed mindedness" is a relative thing Paul.  It can just as easily be argued that learning how capacitors actually work first before you speculate on their behaviour would be the first thing that you should do.  I mean "you" in a general sense here.  For sure there are people here that are "open minded" about capacitors that don't understand how they work.  So they are making speculations from a position of relative ignorance.  I would argue that it's those people that are the closed minded ones.  Opening your mind requires that you be prepared to learn.  Once you learn enough about car engines, you know that you can't put diesel fuel in a gasoline engine and you know that it is futile to do so.

I made good contribution at WikiPedia on kTC noise. Do you even know what kTC noise is? Hurry up, go run over to wikipedia so you can pretend that you knew.


I stand by my statement that you are closed minded to claims that go against convention physics.


Paul

Pirate88179

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8366
Re: Ultracaps tested for excess energy
« Reply #62 on: December 03, 2009, 05:36:43 AM »
Bill:

The "testing" argument is nothing more than an attempt by the "believers" to put up a protective shield and pretend that they should not listen to someone else's input because they are going to hear things that they don't want to hear.  Hearing other viewpoints "breaks" their fantasy, they only want to read postings that are in line with their own train of thought.

For example, I stated in one of the JT threads that there is nothing special about supercapacitors and you deleted the posts.  You were so sure of the "research" done in the JT threads that you had to hit the delete buttton because what I stated was "upsetting."  Meanwhile in reading some of your posts I can see that you are a beginner in electronics.  Another example:  I looked at Paul's data and speculated that the capacitance of a supercap increases as the voltage across the cap is increased.  Then the next day I found an IEEE paper that confirmed my speculation.  Broli calls that "utter and complete trash."  Go figure.

I am not stopping Paul from doing his testing and I tried making some suggestions to him for doing his tests.

With respect to supercapacitors, I can think of a crazy but applicable story for you.  You have a high-end Intel i7 gaming machine.  The Intel i8 chip comes out and you say to your friends, "The first thing I am going to do is see if I can get free energy out of the i8 chip.  After all, it's a new Intel chip so you never know it might be a free energy device."  It is as crazy as that with respect to looking for a source of free energy with a supercapacitor.

MileHigh

MH:

With all due respect, this post is way off of the mark.  Yes, you did state in the JT topic that super caps or B-caps were "nothing special" and that you could predict what would or would not happen.  That was fine.  That was your opinion and you did have the right to express it.  What you left out of this scenario was that you posted the same thing, over and over.  You were warned not to keep doing that, but, yet, somehow, you felt it necessary to do so.  We all got your point from your original post.  The folks there can actually read.

The problem is that you were telling many folks that supercaps were no different, to the same folks that have already proved to themselves, and others, that they are.  They posted their experimental results, you again posted what it is that you have "learned".  I posted many videos about how supercaps are different, you posted that "I would expect that from what I have learned".  Great.  Good for you.  What I did not see, and no one has seen, is your experiments and videos substantiating your proclaimed position on the matter.  Where are they?

The good folks you are preaching to have already seen the difference and have moved on to newer and better things.  And here you are saying that we are all wrong and did not see the results we have seen with our own eyes.  This would be funny if it were not so sad.

For the last time, if supercaps or b-caps are no different than ordinary caps, post your own results backing this up.  If Paul is not capable of ever measuring these devices, post you own test results.  If you can't do this, or won't do this, then I say, move out of the way and let real science and new discoveries take over.

Saying the same thing over and over without backing it up is not productive, and is really counterproductive.  Show me your devices and test results and I will be glad to look at them.

Bill

MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Ultracaps tested for excess energy
« Reply #63 on: December 03, 2009, 05:50:11 AM »
Paul:

I think that we would all agree that on face value one would conclude that supercapacitors are not a source of free energy.  Then someone comes up with a proposition that supercapacitors are a possible source of free energy.  That's fine, but let's not loose sight of the fact that the burden of proof lies with those that are making the proposition, and not with those that state capacitors are not a source of free energy.

So you are doing some tests to see if the proposition is true.  Great and more power to you.  The debate should be open to both schools of thought with respect to the proposition, for and against, with the burden of proof clearly on the "for" side.  It's a logical fallacy to accuse me of being closed minded because I am on the "against" side.  I can just as easily accuse the people on the "for" side of being closed minded for different reasons.  The burden of proof rests with the "for" side.

Just for the heck of it, a little thought experiment for you:

Suppose that your tests show the capacitance goes up with temperature.  So you charge a supercap to 1 volt at room temperature of 20 C.  You then put the charged supercap into a thermal chamber and bring the temperature of the supercap up to 30 C.  You know from previous testing that the capacitance will increase by 10% when you do this.

I am not sure if you think that when you take the cap out of the thermal chamber if you can then get more energy out of it.  In fact you will not.  When you take the cap out of the thermal chamber you will observe that its voltage has dropped such that it stores the same amount of energy in it from the start of the test.  The voltage in the cap will drop as the temperature increases.  I am assuming that there are some people reading this that did not realize this simple fact.

The same thing effectively happens when you increase the voltage across the capacitor.  As the capacitor voltage goes up, the capacitance increases, such that the observed voltage increase on the cap will be progressively lesser and lesser than you would normally expect because of the dC/dV phenomenon associated with supercapacitors.

What I speculated earlier was that dC/dV may be at least 100 times a greater effect than dC/dTemp.  Either effect can not possibly produce any form of free energy.  We know that V = Q/C.  We also know that Q is a constant.  Therefore if C increases and Q is a constant, then V has to decrease for increasing C.  We also know that E = 1/2*C*V-squared.  When you punch in the numbers for any combination of C and V, and knowing that there is a fixed relationship between C and V where V = Q/C, then you will find that the solution for the amount of energy in the capacitor will remain constant as C and V vary for a fixed Q.

All of the above relationships apply just as much to supercapacitors as they apply to any other form of capacitor.  There is no rational reason as far as I am concerned to believe that supercapacitors might be a source of free energy.

If you are going to try to be scientific, shouldn't someone be able to suggest a model or a rational explanation for the proposed free energy effect as the basis for their proposition?  I don't think one exists, it is based on hearsay from Gadgetmail.  May I suggest that you qualify Gadget for his electronics knowledge also by reading his postings so you can attach a "confidence grading" to Gadget's hearsay.  "Hearsay" is a fairly tough word to attach to this information and in this case in my opinion it is justified.

Good luck with your testing.

MileHigh

Pirate88179

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8366
Re: Ultracaps tested for excess energy
« Reply #64 on: December 03, 2009, 06:08:57 AM »
Milehigh:

Did you even read your post?

 "I think that we would all agree that on face value one would conclude that supercapacitors are not a source of free energy."

A lot of suppositions here.  "I think".  "We would all agree".  "Face value."  "Supercaps are not a source of free energy."

I posit that you are incorrect on all of these.  Why do you do this?   Where is your proof?  Experiments?  Why do you feel the need to keep posting this over and over?

Prove us wrong.  Do a single experiment or test that backs up your repeated statements.  Where do you come up with this "I think we would all agree...."

I will say, for the record, that "I don't think we all agree.  if we did there would be no discussion.  Paul would not have to do any tests.  These are the tests that you "KNOW" the results beforehand so, to me, this means you are not the guy to do the tests.  But, please feel free to do them anyway.  We would all love to see something that backs up all of your suppositions. 

Please do that or please refrain from posting the same diatribe over and over with nothing to back it up.

Bill

MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Ultracaps tested for excess energy
« Reply #65 on: December 03, 2009, 06:28:11 AM »
Bill:

Quote
The problem is that you were telling many folks that supercaps were no different, to the same folks that have already proved to themselves, and others, that they are.

Quote
The good folks you are preaching to have already seen the difference and have moved on to newer and better things.

What are the differences?  Can you give us at least a two or three paragraph response please?

MileHigh

Pirate88179

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8366
Re: Ultracaps tested for excess energy
« Reply #66 on: December 03, 2009, 06:34:51 AM »
Milehigh:

This is my last attempt.  Do you remember when you were pm'ing me about this very subject?  I asked a question that I did not receive an answer to.  Like why, with my earth battery only putting out 1,9 volts at about 19 mAs can charge a b-cap to 2.6 volts and 650 Farads?  I have an answer that might or might not be correct.

After seeing the scope shot wave forms from my EB I saw a lot of high voltage spikes.  I concluded (not proven) that these supercaps, b-caps, can take these spikes and make them real energy...usable power.  I have seen that and done that and documented that.  I am not sure this is why it is happening but, I have seen the results.

I have built 3 Bedini motors (SSG) and used regular batteries.  My guess, or posit if you will, is that supercaps can handle these spikes and convert them to real power.  A battery can "sort of" do this, after conditioning,  but not as efficient.  This is what I have seen by trying this.

This is where I feel the "extra" energy is coming from.  It does, after all, have to come from somewhere.

So, let me state this for the record here on OU.com.  If Paul's tests fail to show anything "interesting", and Gadget does not win the OU prize, and it turns out that you were correct all along, I say here that I will be one of the first ones to acknowledge that, and that I will publically apologize to you.

I am here to learn.  And if I learn something different than expected or what I thought was reality?  Then I will be the first to say I was wrong.  No problem.  I can do this easily because then, everyone else here will have learned something and, so will I.  This is good.

I am here to learn.  My wish and hope would be that everyone else is too.

Bill

MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Ultracaps tested for excess energy
« Reply #67 on: December 03, 2009, 07:05:12 AM »
Bill:

I am not going to rebut your three technical points and just say that there is noting special or remarkable going on in what you are observing.  I know that you have heard that response before from others including Poynt but this is not the place to go into those details.

So please don't be offended but you haven't convinced me at all with your examples and I have to point out that you did not actually describe any differences between run-of-the-mill capacitors and supercapacitors.

Your comments on the desire to learn are welcomed.  Perhaps one day you and your JT group will get to the point where you see the real deal with respect to your three examples and you might share my viewpoint.  Time will tell.

A little thought experiment for you:  You are in a park and are sitting next to a merry-go-round.  It is an ideal merry-go-round on frictionless bearings and there is no air friction.  You have a small ball-peen hammer in your hand and you hit a rail on the merry-go-round and it starts to turn.  Every second you hit the merry-go-round with your ball-peen hammer and it slowly starts to speed up.  Just like there are frictionless bearings and no air friction, you have a near "magic arm" and can still hit the merry go round with your hammer so that keeps on speeding up faster and faster.  Eventually you decide that the merry-go-round is spinning fast enough and you stop hitting it with your ball-peen hammer.  The merry-go-round then just spins "forever" since there is no bearing or air friction.

That is what is going on with your first example, the earth battery charging the supercap.  That is what the electric circuit is doing.  Perhaps it sounds crazy and incomprehensible to you, but if you keep on learning perhaps one day it will make sense to you.

Anybody that says that this was a junk posting can kiss my ass.

MileHigh

Pirate88179

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8366
Re: Ultracaps tested for excess energy
« Reply #68 on: December 03, 2009, 07:39:35 AM »
Well, I say it was a junk posting so, you did not have, once again, any answers to offer.  You dodged, very poorly I might add, very direct questions.  Thanks for the physics 101 example of the merry go round.  You must have such a high opinion of yourself that you think we don't know anything.  Have you designed and built parts that are now on Mars?  (I have)  What have you done...exactly?  Why should we listen to you?

No answers?

Exactly.

So, unless you have something to add to the conversation, I suggest you join poynt and take all of your great and wonderful knowledge that none of us will ever have, and go somewhere else.  Your mind is closed.  You have demonstrated that to all of us repeatedly.  I give up.  It is not my job in life to educate you.  You probably know more about electronics than I will ever know, but, you don't know everything and, you have quit learning.

This is very sad.

Bill

MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Ultracaps tested for excess energy
« Reply #69 on: December 03, 2009, 07:51:41 AM »
Bill:

You are forgetting that I asked you to answer my question about the differences between ordinary capacitors and supercapacitors, which you failed to answer.  I was just asking you to back up your own statements, which you can't do.  Don't try to twist that into a pop quiz related to the "mysteries" from your JT thread that you are a asking me to explain.  I could answer each one of your questions/examples with ease, but this is not the place to do that.  I am pretty sure that you would not even understand my answers if I gave you the "straight technical goods."

You _think_ that you are pushing the envelope, but you are in reality in your own self-imposed Dark Age with no Renaissance in sight.  And don't tell me not to speak one more time.

Back to Paul's research....

MileHigh

Pirate88179

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8366
Re: Ultracaps tested for excess energy
« Reply #70 on: December 03, 2009, 07:59:29 AM »
Milehigh:

Yes, Paul's research.  His results will answer your question.  I am willing to wait for the results....are you?

I never said don't speak.  I did politely ask you, again and again, not to keep positing the same things over and over and over, with nothing to back them up.  No experiments, no research,...nothing. I do believe everyone on this forum knows where you stand.  I also say that, you might be right.  We just do not need you to keep repeating yourself over and over, the same thing with nothing to back it up.

We now officially have your opinion MH. (for like the 300th time)   Let's see what the experimenters and testers results show.  Fair enough?  OK?  if you do not like the outcome...again I say, do your own testing!!!!!!!!!!

Bill

electricme

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1372
Re: Ultracaps tested for excess energy
« Reply #71 on: December 03, 2009, 09:04:10 AM »
@ MileHigh,

I have been quietly reading the posts from the beginning, I don't want to get into a flame war, as it won't achieve anything constructive.
As an off sider, I "can" see both points of view.

In this day and age there are remarkable discoveries made, and many more will be made in all different sciences, and it so happens that a "new" type of capacitor has been discovered, to add to the range of capacitors.

This capacitor is able to hold a lot more energy than what has been able to be crambed into the humble aluminium canister.
I have read on the internet stories of some of the older generations (valve generation) who when confronted with this new technology who say it is impossible.

Well, fair enough, I also read somewhere in a school book back in the early 60s that man said if a car went faster than 100 miles an hour, then he would be squashed flat, Malcolm Campbell in his bluebird was able to do it and lived to tell the tale, and he went a lot faster.

We also were told that the aeroplane couldn't fly faster than the speed of sound, ha ha, look at the BlackBird, doesn't it go faster than mack 3.

So we in this day and age hear there is a new thingi-what-cha-a-ma-call it that can store more energy than a battery, I say wacko, lets see it and lets see it tested.
 
If someone makes a claim for overunity, then you can be assured this super cap willed be grilled over like a shrimp on a barbie, it will be tested and tested over and over again and again.

Mile High, I live in another country, in Australia, and you can bet I will have my eyes glued to the screen to see the outcome of these tests that Paul is doing.

We have an Electronics magazine out here called Silicon Chipp, they have heard of the super cap, and they have done a story on it, you can read the beginning of it here   http://www.siliconchip.com.au/cms/A_110327/article.html

To test them here is a link to a circuit that someone has made (not I), but it mentions super capacitors http://www.siliconchip.com.au/cms/A_30372/article.html browse down almost to the end and you will see it.

Then there is the Super Super Capacitor, these people are taking it seriously   http://lofi.forum.physorg.com/super-super-capacitor_1220.htm then scroll down to the end to a link for further reading.

MileHigh, it is a new technology, and with a doubt, there isn't a single sole here who knows all there is to know about it, it is exciting stuff, so lets all work together to try and understand it.

jim



PaulLowrance

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2483
    • Global Free Energy
Re: Ultracaps tested for excess energy
« Reply #72 on: December 03, 2009, 02:45:50 PM »
I think that we would all agree that on face value one would conclude that supercapacitors are not a source of free energy. [snip] It's a logical fallacy to accuse me of being closed minded because I am on the "against" side.

Once again you demonstrate closed mindedness. You keep saying the main effect is due to voltage, when I've presented data that contradicts your claim. And you ignore my statement, time after time you keep using that false claim to back up your claim that it's not excess energy.


I can just as easily accuse the people on the "for" side of being closed minded for different reasons.  The burden of proof rests with the "for" side.

It is illogical to say that people who are doing the experiments are being closed minded. You might want to rethink your stance.



Just for the heck of it, a little thought experiment for you:

Suppose that your tests show the capacitance goes up with temperature.  So you charge a supercap to 1 volt at room temperature of 20 C.  You then put the charged supercap into a thermal chamber and bring the temperature of the supercap up to 30 C.  You know from previous testing that the capacitance will increase by 10% when you do this.

I am not sure if you think that when you take the cap out of the thermal chamber if you can then get more energy out of it.  In fact you will not.  When you take the cap out of the thermal chamber you will observe that its voltage has dropped such that it stores the same amount of energy in it from the start of the test.  The voltage in the cap will drop as the temperature increases.  I am assuming that there are some people reading this that did not realize this simple fact.

One has to assume, give your above quote, that you are unaware of an irreversible effect, or your mind simply did not see the obvious. There are reasons for it could be an irreversible effect. Charging the UC could producing microscopic temperature changes, which in turn could cause increase the electrolytes effectiveness. You are aware of the inner workings of a UC, hopefully. The UC consists of a material with high surface density. Anyhow, it's a waste of time explaining this to you. You cannot replicate all of the microscopic effects by applying a macro temperature change.

I'm afraid this is a waste of time. IMO you have clearly demonstrated your closed mindedness.

In my next post I'll re-outline my thoughts on what might be occurring in the UC.

Paul

PaulLowrance

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2483
    • Global Free Energy
Re: Ultracaps tested for excess energy
« Reply #73 on: December 03, 2009, 03:00:40 PM »
This is pretty much a re-post of what I've already said because the thread is getting cluttered up.

Existing measurements have show how the UC (ultracap) measured capacitance varies with UC usage. That  is, usage in terms of the amount of current for a given per time period. When the UC is used, measured capacitance increases by a noticeable amount. As seen in the measurements, which were posted, this effect was seen at various voltage levels, and therefore this effect is not due to the non-linearities of the UC, which are far less noticeable.

The two possible explanations that I'm aware of are,

1. Excess energy (yes, that is still a possibility).

2. Dielectric absorption. Also know as dielectric hysteresis, or dielectric relaxation, and sometimes as dielectric soakage.

3. An unknown effect.


The only logical conclusion, if one wants to know the above answer, is to do the experiments.

Regards.
Paul

PaulLowrance

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2483
    • Global Free Energy
Re: Ultracaps tested for excess energy
« Reply #74 on: December 03, 2009, 03:56:06 PM »
In case a few people are wondering, an example of an irreversible effect is when a DC voltage is applied to a resistor where the resistor heats up, but the opposite does not occur. When we heat up the resistor, a DC voltage is not produce.

It's safe to say there are a lot of irreversible effects within an ultracap. UC current would produce microscopic, actually it's probably closer to nanoscopic temperatures on the surfaces of the micro globular structures within the UC.

Paul