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: Crystal Power CeLL by John Hutchison  (Read 523959 times)

Koen1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: Crystal Power CeLL by John Hutchison
« Reply #345 on: May 30, 2008, 12:37:13 PM »
so why not try the easy way first !?
Because there is no easy way... The author, in my opinion, shows that he has not really thought this thing
through deeply enough... Or at least, that is the impression I get...

Quote
use direct carbon-iron polarisation by auto crystallizing a simple rod of steel (4mm),
Excuse me? What do you mean "auto-crystallising"? Are you suggsting I heat a steel rod to its melting point,
then have it crystallise? What good would that do?
Quote
with no others complicated thing, i would like to have your analysis on that too ! if the iron-carbon direct association give an electrinium producing too lot of volts, i do not see any problem with that....

Well the problem I have with the simple electrinium unit described in his chapter 9 is as follows:
He says we should use for example steel as the negative and gold or platinum as the positive, and then
to use steel as the encasing body. He also says we can use steel, Si, Ge, C, and other materials as casing.
In the chapter 10 description of the prototype he then opts for Si casing with Fe and Ag as negative resp. positive
elements.
So according to him, Fe is more negative than Ag, and steel (Fe + 0-2% C) is more negative than Au and Pt.
First of all he is being very unclear as to what exactly he means with this "positive"/"negative" terminology.
There are very clear terms for such things, but he does not use them.
Let us assume for a minute that he means the electronegativity per element. That would give
iron a 1.83, silver a 1.93, platinum a 2.28 and gold a 2.54, while silicium has 1.9.
So that would make Fe the least electronegative and relatively electropositive...
Now definition of electronegativity is "the ability of an atom to attract electrons for covalent bonding",
so this basically says that if these materials are put together, gold will "pull in" electrons from
the other materials the strongest, then platiunum, then silver, then silicium, then iron.
Other way around, the materials that will most easily give away an electron are the same
series in reverse.
That seems to imply that the materials are in fact oppositely charged compared to the discription
given by the author: Fe is in fact more positive than Ag, but tha author claims it is the other way around.
This makes me question how correct he is in his reasoning.

Secondly, just think about the unit suggested in chapter 9:
so we have steel and gold as compound elements, which is basically Fe-Au (let's just forget for a second
that steel is Fe + 0-2% C). Then we cast this in an encasing of steel.
What we end up with is obviously a block of steel with a certain amount of gold particles in it.
So what he claims is apparently that, if we make a block of steel with some gold particles
in it, which would in normal terminology be called a block of Steel-Gold alloy,
that this block now produces lots of electricity?
Highly unlikely, in my opinion. Even if there were any electricity produced by the "electrinium compound",
the steel casing would allow the electrons to flow back in so-called Eddies and localised currents,
and the entire thing should basically "short-circuit" itself and at best become hot.

Third, as far as I know the mixing of two metals, especially if one or both are liquid, is called
alloying. Also, the mixing of metals is not the same as water-based chemistry.
The author seems to think that we can simply take a bunch of loose atoms of Iron and
a bunch of loose atoms of Silver and have them react into Silver-Iron. It is not that simple.
Iron and Silver are both metals, and in solution they will tend to react with other elements
and not so easily with eachother. If they do react in a solution it is quite likely there will be
hydrides or hydroxides formed, and not pure Fe-Ag molecules.
And then, even if you do have molecules of the compound, for example the Fe-Au molecules
for use in the steel casing, then just imagine what happens when you pour molten steel over them?
Bye bye seperate molecules, hello big blob of liquid alloy! No molecules left to polarise,
it is now a molten metal that will form one big crystal with some gold atoms spread
out through the metal.

Fourth, let's assume he does have a point and when two dissimilar atoms are combined they
can form a pair of which one acts as the positive and the other as the negative "pole".
Obviously we are then talking about the relatively positive atom that binds with the relatively
negative atom to form a neutral compound. So, in this bond, does the positive atom
receive an electron from the negative atom? That would seem to imply the e-field runs
from the negative to the positive atom... Why would this now neutral compound still want
to attract electrons on either side? Why would there be an external e-field to the molecule?
After all, we must have an external e-field for any effects to be observable at all...

Or does the author perhaps intend to say that the "positive" atom must more easily give its
electron to the "negative" atom, and that this "negative" atom then transfers this to the casing
more easily than giving it back to the "positive" atom, while the "positive" atom absorbs one electron
from the casing more easily than that it takes one from the "negative" atom?
That seems quite contradictory: after all, it would mean that the "positive" atom must be more
positive than the casing in order to absorb the electron from it, but at the same time the "negative"
atom must be more negative than the casing in order to donate an electron to it, and meanwhile
the "negative" atom must be more positive than the "positive" atom in order to absorb an electron
from it. That does not work. Casing=>atomA=>atomB=>Casing cannot be nn=>n=>p=>pp because
nn cannot be pp at the same time.

So you see, I get the impression that the author did not really think it though very well after all.
It seems to me that he has looked at it from one angle while forgetting to take into account
how it looks from the other angle. From the angle of pure electrovalent bonding it seems to
make sense, but from the angle of n-p bias conduction it does not seem to make sense.

It comes down to something very close to the opposite polarity issue Ian and I have been
considering for a while. The polarisation of the dielectric particles that make the e-field
in an electret must be opposed to the n-p bias of the entire material block (the casing)
for such a type of "battery" to work. And that is a problem in constructing them, because
whenever you apply electric fields to polarise the material it doesn't just polarise the
dielectric molecules, but it also changes the division of p- and n- pollution in the semi-
conductor material which kills the intended effect.

That's my view. At the moment. ;)

Quote
if it is easy it must be easy, the author his a real master, i can sense it in his expression of his understanding
I do not agree. I agree that the author is convinced this will work. But I have serious doubts about the depth of his insight.
But I tried to explain this above. :)

Quote
and we can find an another way to do with silver-iron ?? well may be yes may be not but do not take the peanut, try easy first !!? = iron-carbon
I strongly feel that the experiments I have been doing are very, very closely related to the ideas of the author of Electrinium,
and that I have already found his simplistic view to be too simple. In my experience, this is not how compounds behave. Simply putting
electret-like dielectric compounds inside a (semi)conductive coating does not produce electricity. Yes, it produces electrical charge,
just like an electret, but that is not current.
That's exactly where we are now: we can make electret-like cells that give a nice voltage, but it's the amperage that we're trying to boost now.
The charge is there, the current is just lacking.
Experiments have shown that using too conductive materials seems to kill the output entirely, probably shorts the cell by internal Eddies.
Besides, if it would work as simply as stated in the pdf, do you not think we had heard something about the first successful electrinium battery by now?
It's been almost 30 years since the author wrote it, he must have tried to make one by now. I think he tried and failed and gave up...

regards,
Koen

Koen1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: Crystal Power CeLL by John Hutchison
« Reply #346 on: May 30, 2008, 02:03:06 PM »
Quote from: Drannom wrote in PM to Koen1
yes i beleive that only one short hot hot red rod of steel will crystallize while putting a lot of volts at low current

so it may possible that no one have tried this, but in this forum i have seen a topic showing steel rod producing overunity!!

Are you sure you're not talking about the carbon rod that seems to show OU? That one's different, it just works in a B field and
when pulsed with hV, and even then only 2 people claim to have seen the OU effect...

I have not seen a steel rod produce OU on the forum... can you please give that link or the title of that thread?

And I think just applying a hV low amp current to a red hot steel rod has been done before because it is relatively simple.
But you can try it if you like.
I suspect it may be possible to achieve a circular magnetisation in the rod that way, but I doubt it will produce actual current.

Quote
i do not want to argue more in the forum, cause i will put all the extrac from electrinium to make you understand the dark side of your understanding
If you would explain to me what you mean with "the dark side of my understanding" I might understand what you mean.
Besides that, I was not agruing at all.
I was just explaining to you how I see the electrinium theory. I see it as partially very interesting reasoning, and partially
too simplistic and based on a lack of actual hands-on experimenting.
you asked me to explain my view, and I did.
There was no arguing going on. We were not in a verbal fight.
Or at least, not as far as I noticed... :)

Quote
when i ask you to talk about CARBON-IRON do not talk about nothing else, no gold no platinium etc etc easy it's easy, so i could not trust you anymore due to your non hability to respond sincerely to my posts
That, and pardon my French, is bullshit Drannom.
You asked me to explain to you what my view is on the authors theory and on the suggested electrinium units.
I explain to you why I sincerely doubt the realism of the authors claims, I explain to you why in detail using and
referring to the authors own examples, I explain where I see problems in that reasoning that the author himself
did not address and perhaps not realise when he wrote the text, I explain what I think he omitted and why I think
if will not work if you do incorporate those pieces of information into the theory, and I feel that is an extremely
complete analysis of why such a unit will not work. 
It does not matter if the materials are Iron and Gold, Iron and Silver or Iron and Carbon, because that does not
change a single thing in my analysis of the authors reasoning.

Your conclusion that you cannot "trust" me because I do not reply sincerely to your posts is complete nonsense.
If you cannot follow or understand my analysis then that is a problem due to your own limitations, and not due to
any lack of sincerety nor to a lack of willingness to explain from me.
If you don't like what I say then that's ok, but do not try to spin it and turn it into a matter of me not being sincere,
because that is simply not true and I do in fact resent any such allegation.


Quote
why not look to my reptilians topic, it seems that this forum is full of non sincere members
One more remark like that and you can choke on your croissant for all I care.
I'm giving you an honest and quite extensive answer, and you reward me by insulting me?
Asshole.

Koen1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: Crystal Power CeLL by John Hutchison
« Reply #347 on: May 30, 2008, 03:14:35 PM »
@Ian & all:
Brief update on the Quirk: it is still not solid.
The stainless steel box with Quirk in it is still the same,
although a little bit has dripped over the sides, but at least the
stuff hasn't actually "climbed out" of the container. It is still
vry gooey and liquid/slimey stuff, has not hardened yet.
The Quirk around the copper rod wrapped in alu foil did not
stay in place, it has crawled out of the foil on both the top
and bottom end. Instead of squeezing it back in I decided to leave it.
The Quirk in the aluminium cylinder that I used to cook it up in,
the thin lining of quirk between that alu cylinder wall and the cylinder
of copper foil has not come out. Some of it has, but that's only
a little bit at the top. Most of the stuff seems to still be between the
alu and the copper. What is interesting is that the aluminium tube now
appears to be "sweating" some substance... In certain regions one
can clearly see how droplets have formed on the outside cylinder
wall while there is absolutely no trace of them dripping down from the
top of the cylinder. The "sweat" droplets also seem slightly gooey
and bubbly, which suggests the stuff reacted with something.
I will take a picture of it if I get a chance, so you guys can see what
the cylinder looks like now. It is clearly no longer a neat pure aluminium tube,
that's for sure.
Lol could we call it "Germalluminium"? ;) ;D

Also, with the recent revisit of the electrinium theory, I have come to
ponder the n-p polarisation problem again.
The problem remains: we can make electret-like dielectrically
polarised material that produces a nice and fairly constant voltage,
but it has (near) zero current = amperage. We can make a diode-like
material that does have a n-p bias thus allows only one direction of
current, but it does not have an internal dielectric field that produces
actual potential difference, so it needs an external potential difference
to work. The polarisation directions of these are opposed to eachother,
so attempts to combine the two will result in a material where the
n-p bias to current is opposed to the dielectric potential difference,
and thus still zero current will flow.
What we need is a method to polarise these two "elements" oppositely
in the same block of material, at the same time.
Obviously it is impossible to apply two opposite elecrical fields simultaneously.
(ok, not impossible, but the net field will be zero)
So I have been thinking of using an electrical field to polarise one,
while using a magnetic field to polarise the other...
I do not know if that will work, to be honest. It seems that, if we were to
wind a coil around the material as to get a "coiled coil", this should
induce another linear A-field along this "coiled coil"'s axis. Although
it is an A-field, there is no actual current supplied in that direction
through a closed circuit... Would this result in electro"static" polarisation
of the material in between?
Hmmm... well, even if it would, any applied direct electric field would most
likely still pull the positive particles to the negative electrode and vice versa,
so even then it seems it is improbable such a simultaneous opposite polarisation
can be achieved in one block of material in this manner. :(

Suggestions? :)

jeanna

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3546
Re: Crystal Power CeLL by John Hutchison
« Reply #348 on: May 30, 2008, 06:43:29 PM »
Go for it Koen,

I have been wondering for a while now if wrapping a chunk of crystal in a wire,then pulsing the wire would orient the polarities within the crystal into a way that would allow us to use / extract the electricity that is within the crystal.

----------

Along what seems to me to be similar lines, I have found that while using similar metals for electrodes (in this case Al) The one on the outer edge seems to always be the + and the one in the center the -.

By that I mean If I connect the red lead to the outside the meter will show a positive voltage.

I could speculate on its meaning, but I won't.

However, it may be a place to begin experimenting.

The voltages and amps on my crystal are still rising, but perhaps stabilizing as the crystal becomes dry. 0.537vdc  15uA on the cheese pot. I moved the probe to a piece of foil a bit  away from the pot where no crystal could have migrated. (no Ga   ;) )

jeanna

Drannom

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 250
    • Cristallerie La Pyramide d'Alun
Re: Crystal Power CeLL by John Hutchison
« Reply #349 on: June 02, 2008, 04:19:17 AM »
It's not fair to use the MP i have sent to you, it was to not butter you anymore here, there is another MP that you have not use yet !

Don't ask why i don't trust you ! you have just use my PM against me !

i am not an ass hole, and you can not handle a private MP converstion

and what about military diodes ??

and who are you to destroy the electrinium.pdf ?

there is a schist, start a topic on the electrinium ? not me, i have seen enough of you

i will always remember to never write a PM again to try to solve a problem with a member

not fair not fair really not fair

Koen1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: Crystal Power CeLL by John Hutchison
« Reply #350 on: June 02, 2008, 12:15:04 PM »
It's not fair to use the MP i have sent to you, it was to not butter you anymore here, there is another MP that you have not use yet !
It was not fair of you to accuse me of being dishonest and unsincere either. Yet you did it.
And you did it in PM so nobody else could see your completely unfounded accusations.
I do not like to be called a liar and dishonest, and especially not when the entire stroy on the basis of which you accuse me
has transpired in the public forum. I thought at least we could let the others see how you accuse me of dishonesty,
while for some reason you do not want others to know about your accusations... Who's being dishonest now?
Seems to me the guy who first asks for my view in public and then chooses to call me a liar in private is the one
trying to keep things secret... Funny notion of sincerety and honesty you have there... Must be French...




Quote
Don't ask why i don't trust you ! you have just use my PM against me !
Yes, I have made public the accusation you made of me being dishonest in my answer to you.
Because for some strange reason you seemed to think being very secretive about it
would give you the moral high ground or something? But unfortunately that doesn't work.
You can't accuse people of dishonesty while you are yourself being very sneaky about it.
Well, you can, but you'll lose credibility of course. ;)
First of all I did not use you PM against you, I simply repled in public to an accusation
you made in private which I resent and deny and which was based on test I posted in
full public view so I see no reason to suddenly keep your reply to that secret. plus I don't
see why I should have to keep your false accusation secret either.
You should have thought about this before falsely accusing me of dishonest answers to
your questions.
You may disagree with me and I am fully willing to discuss that, but do not accuse me
of such things as being insincere in my answers to you. I may see things differently and
answer your questions in a way that you are not used to, but that does not make my
reply insincere nor dishonest.
While your reaction was anything but civil.

Quote
i am not an ass hole, and you can not handle a private MP converstion
In the situation where you secretly try to accuse me unjustly while the entire argumentation
of which you accuse me to be dishonest has been held in public forum, I chose
not to comply with your dubious secrecy and show your injust accusation in reply to
my argumentation to the rest of the forum members as well. And I did so because I find
such an action to be that of an asshole. So in that situation and according to my personal
view after just having been insulted by you, you were indeed an asshole.

Quote
and what about military diodes ??
What about them?
I know quite a lot about diodes, but your question is too vague.
What sort of military diodes are you talking about?
It is known that, especially older types of, germanium based diodes often
showed anomalies when they came of the production line, and most of all
when they were only just taken into production. They used to test them all
and only those that tested ok were shipped out. It happened quite regularly,
or so it is said, that during testing a diode would be found that didn't just
work as a diode but actually produced output all the time.
But that was not what they were testing for, and most were destroyed.
There are also accounts of electrical repair men from around the 50s/60s
that describe how such diodes could sometimes apparently become slightly
changed over the years of use, and some of these used diodes would
also produce output without actual input...

Then of course all diodes were originally military devices anyway, or at least all
crystal diodes. The German army developed the first germanium semiconductor
crystal diodes for use in U-boot radio/radar detectors, and the US army used
semiconductive compounds during the war and intrinsic semiconductor crystal
diodes of various types after the war. Part of the tech was stolen from the Germans
of course.

So what exactly do you mean when you say "military diodes"?

And why do you feel they are related to electrinium in any way?

Crystal diodes are well known p-n semiconductor technology.
Electrinium is not, nor clearly comparable at all.


Quote
and who are you to destroy the electrinium.pdf ?
I have not "destroyed" the pdf. It is still there. I would never "destroy" it. What nonsense.
If you mean to say who am I to think I understand better what the author of that pdf thinks
he is talking about?
Well, a person with a brain, who believes proper understanding is better than worshipping
the text some person wrote.
Rational understanding is better than belief. You can choose to believe whatever people write,
or you can understand, think about it, and see the light of reason.
Wasn't Descartes a Frenchman? I would have expected you to understand. ;)
But really, instead of blindly assuming what the guy wrote because it sounds quite nice
and has a bit of a mystical ring to it, plus it plugs into the quasi-mystical Tesla mythology,
I compare it to the many model variations of which I know they can be very usefully applied
to work out systems of polarised material matrices with diode and-/or electret-like qualities,
and I cannot help but notice a number of inconsistencies between the two. I also know that
a lot of research has been done and knowledge has been gathered with respect to crystal
diodes, and very little to none of that supports the view as described by the author.
Anyway, your question seems to come down to "who are you to dare and give your own view
and opinion on the electrinium pdf" and that is just nonsense. who am I?
A human being, sir, with a mind and an opinion.
Is that no longer allowed in your "libert?, egalit?, fraternit?" world view?"
Must we bow down to the holy scriptures as written by peope in the past,
or may we indeed still form opinions and talk about them?
I find your standpoind a bit strange.

Quote
there is a schist, start a topic on the electrinium ? not me, i have seen enough of you
Great, so have I of you sir.
Perhaps you can get your whining butt out of my crystal cell thread then!

Quote
i will always remember to never write a PM again to try to solve a problem with a member
Then please beware not to confuse a proper discussion of a topic with a "problem" again either.
You have been causing this "problem" by accusing me and doing so in a secretive manner.
You can try to blame the wind for the fire, but it was really your spark that caused it. ;)

Quote
not fair not fair really not fair
says the guy who unjustly accused another of dishonesty in a non-public message.
Pot calling kettle black sort of idea maybe eh?

Drannom

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 250
    • Cristallerie La Pyramide d'Alun
Re: Crystal Power CeLL by John Hutchison
« Reply #351 on: June 02, 2008, 09:50:13 PM »
The Permanent Electrinium Battery
http://youtube.com/watch?v=sNZNoNPI3hc&feature=related
http://www.nuenergy.org/pdf/electrinium.pdf

it was in page 4, i follow this topic from the beginning and the carbon fusion closely

thank you dcarlson, it is by you that i have discover the electrinium.pdf, great reading for me

in my first message up here i was talking that hutchison found a military diode acting like an electrinium a little bit, i repeat to wonder to find such a kind of diode , it was the beginning of Hutchison, why i have to repeat what is up this page

Koen1 you have act like a baby instead of talking with me in PM, i beleive every readers of this topic can make is own though, for me it was useless from you and a very lost of our precious time


Pirate88179

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8366
Re: Crystal Power CeLL by John Hutchison
« Reply #352 on: June 03, 2008, 04:28:38 AM »
@ Koen1:

Just keep on doing what you are doing and ignore any "complaints" from the peanut gallery.  I have always
found you to be an honorable person on any topic here and have seen you go out of your way to explain things to those that might not understand. (Myself included)  You, unlike many on here, no name mentioned to protect the guilty, are an experimenter and put your tests where your mouth is.  We need more folks on here like you that actually do, and not just talk. (or type)  My 2.5 cents. ( Due to inflation)


Bill

clearchrome

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 71
Re: Crystal Power CeLL by John Hutchison
« Reply #353 on: June 03, 2008, 05:27:05 AM »
Something that might be of interest to testing the Xtal battery.

http://www.rexresearch.com/reid/reid.htm

Koen1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: Crystal Power CeLL by John Hutchison
« Reply #354 on: June 03, 2008, 12:02:53 PM »
Thanks Bill :)

That reminds me, I have better things to do than waste my time repeating
what was already said and explained to persons not to be named.

Back to the lab! :D
Let's see what mischief the Quirk got into this time ;)

Also, wild&crazy sideline experiment suggested by one of my friends,
and something I intentionally did not do till now but am seriously considering
to perform soon: open up a fresh alkaline D battery and get the innards out,
so basically pull out the carbon rod and the goo around it so you're left
with the zinc tube. Or at least, in most common alkaline batteries it is still
a zinc tube with a carbon rod. Anyway, then use that zinc tube instead of the
aluminium tube, fill it with cell material, etc. See how well the zinc holds out
with a few different mixtures of material.
I do not expect it to work very well as zinc should not integrate as nicely into
most of my material mixes as aluminium does... But there is a chance it does
something interesting, and I should still have a few of those large D batteries
around somewhere...
And another idea, the ferrite/magnetite revisited; basically use a material mix with
a high iron (and/or cobalt and/or nickel) content in a specifically shaped magnetic field
(radial magnetic field) while not just polarising the material but also allowing a nice
current (of an amp or so) to run through it. Basically the same idea as some time ago,
but now with a different magnetic field appllied during solidification.
Ideas ideas... ;)

ian middleton

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 162
Re: Crystal Power CeLL by John Hutchison
« Reply #355 on: June 03, 2008, 01:05:54 PM »
G'day all,

@Koen:  I tried the ol pull apart D cell trick and found that these days it is rare to find a carbon rod inside. There is a metal spike
coming up from the negative base, a solid thick coating of what looks like manganese dioxide on the inside of the zinc tube and the rest is filled with the alkaline paste which the spike goes into. Messy, very messy  ;D

Today I was playing around with a large pyrites crystal. It's a single unit about 1 cm cube. It has extremely smooth sides with a mirror finish.  I had a couple attempts at plating one of the sides with Gallium but the Ga did not take.
Anyway I found a small bead of Ga and dicided to spot weld it to the pyrites with the 2KV from the bug zapper. That did the trick.

Not expecting to get anything I measured a voltage across the junction. It was a massive 0.3mV  ;D.  Next I looked to see if there was any current with the AVO 8.  1uA.  These values are not going to set the world on fire BUT  the voltage and current have remaind stable all day. I reversed all the meter leads and got -0.3mV and -1uA .

The resistance is 1.6Kohm one way and 210 ohm the other.
 I tried to make another one using a clump of small pyrite crystals but got no reading at all, so I may have just got lucky with my first attempt.

I also decided to hook the digital watch up the pyrites cell ( made 2nd March ) and it is running fine on the one cell. This cell is putting out 1.302 volts with the watch as the load. (yeh I know, some load  ;D ).

If I can find a spare oscilloscope I will test to see if the watch places a frequency across the cell, I did notice the cell voltage rise slightly when the watch was attatched.  You never know a small frequency across the cell may make it work better.

Ok I'm off to earn some dosh.
Catch you later dudes  and dudette   ;D


Ian

Koen1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: Crystal Power CeLL by John Hutchison
« Reply #356 on: June 04, 2008, 01:19:59 PM »
@Koen:  I tried the ol pull apart D cell trick and found that these days it is rare to find a carbon rod inside. There is a metal spike
coming up from the negative base, a solid thick coating of what looks like manganese dioxide on the inside of the zinc tube and the rest is filled with the alkaline paste which the spike goes into. Messy, very messy  ;D
Lol :) yeah, I could have mentioned that part I guess... ;)
It is often a messy business to dismantle batteries, and indeed nowadays many alkaline batteries no longer contain a nice carbon rod.
Many nowadays seem to consist of an isolated metal pin, not uncommonly a cheap nail, stuck in a paste-like material of some kind.
But my main aim was to get the zinc cylinder out, so it doesn't really matter much what kind of electrolyte/conductor mix they have;
I only wanted to try a zinc tube and use a D battery to get one easily.
Nice of you to pick up on it so quickly though. :D

Quote
Today I was playing around with a large pyrites crystal. It's a single unit about 1 cm cube. It has extremely smooth sides with a mirror finish.  I had a couple attempts at plating one of the sides with Gallium but the Ga did not take.
Anyway I found a small bead of Ga and dicided to spot weld it to the pyrites with the 2KV from the bug zapper. That did the trick.
;D

Quote
Not expecting to get anything I measured a voltage across the junction. It was a massive 0.3mV  ;D.  Next I looked to see if there was any current with the AVO 8.  1uA.  These values are not going to set the world on fire BUT  the voltage and current have remaind stable all day. I reversed all the meter leads and got -0.3mV and -1uA .
Hey now that ain't bad :)
and an interesting subtopic you've hit there, too...

Funny, Gallium+Pyrite or more accurately Iron-Gallium-Sulfate, is not really famous for its semiconductive properties as far as I know...
But during a session of infodigging on gallium some time ago I did come across some vaguely related compounds;
To name a few, there is the compound Nickel-Gallium-Sulfide on which a quote from the encyclopedia Brittannica which checks out
referencewise states:
Quote
For more than 30 years, scientists had been trying to verify the existence of a ?liquid? magnetic state. In theory, such a state would occur when the magnetic spins of the electrons in a material fluctuated in a disorderly fluidlike arrangement in contrast to the ordered alignment of magnetic spins that produces magnetism. Liquid magnetic states might be related to the way that electrons flow in superconducting materials. Satoru Nakatsuji and co-workers at Kyoto University synthesized a material, nickel gallium sulfide (NiGa2S4), that might demonstrate its existence. The Japanese team and researchers from Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md., and... etc

Then there is an application of Gallium Sulfide as an alternate form of glass with good infrared transparency (from http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/5392376.html):
Quote
This invention is directed broadly to transparent glasses exhibiting excellent transmission far into the infrared region of the electromagnetic radiation spectrum, those glasses consisting essentially, expressed in terms of mole percent, of 40-80% Ga2 S3, 0-35% RSx, wherein R is at least one network forming cation selected from the group consisting of aluminum, antimony, arsenic, germanium, and indium, 1-50% Ln2 S3, wherein Ln is at least one cation selected from the group consisting of a rare earth metal cation and yttrium, 1-45% MSx, wherein M is at least one modifying metal cation selected from the group consisting of barium, cadmium, calcium, lead, lithium, mercury, potassium, silver, sodium, strontium, thallium, and tin, and 0-10% total chloride and/or fluoride. Glass compositions consisting essentially, expressed in terms of mole percent, of 5-30% Ga2 S3, 0-10% R2 S3, wherein R is at least one network forming cation selected from the group consisting of aluminum, antimony, arsenic, and indium, 55-94.5% GeS2, 0.5-25% MSx, wherein M is at least one modifying metal cation selected from the group consisting of barium, cadmium, calcium, lead, lithium, potassium, silver, sodium, strontium, tin, yttrium, and a rare earth metal of the lanthanide series, 0-10% total selenide, 0-25% total chloride and/or fluoride, and wherein the sulfur and/or selenium content can vary between 85-125% of the stoichiometric value when doped with Pr demonstrate exceptionally high values of ͌.


Then there is the factoid, supplied mainly from the biochemical field, that Gallium apparently "looks like" Iron to many organisms, which lead to its use
as a bacteriocidal substance to MRSA bacteria according to some cources, and suggests a possible role in the biochemical cycles of certain fungi,
as stated in http://www.webelements.com/nexus/node/1167
Quote
"Gallium acts as a Trojan horse to iron-seeking bacteria," said Pradeep Singh (senior author). "Because gallium looks like iron, invading bacteria are tricked, in a way, into taking it up. Unfortunately for the bacteria, gallium can't function like iron once it's inside bacterial cells."
and http://umbbd.msi.umn.edu/periodic/elements/ga.html
Quote
Gallium and iron have similar ionic radii, and chelation by iron siderophores has been shown to be a mechanism of gallium uptake in fungi Muller et al, 1985). Gallium accumulation has also been observed in bacteria (Menon et al, 1978), and the toxicity of gallium is likely due to interference with iron-dependent metabolism (Al-Aoukaty, 1992; Olaka et al, 2000). Thiobacillus ferrooxidans can leach gallium from chalcopyrite, and evidence suggests that this organism can directly oxidize gallium sulfide (Torma, 1978).

And of course we know that Gallium-based semiconductive compounds have become very popular in the new colour LEDs, where GaAs and GaN (Gallium Arsenide
and Gallium Nitride) are used. Similar use can be made of Gallium Phosphide (according to http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplore/login.jsp?url=/iel3/4100/12123/00557347.pdf?arnumber=557347), and likewise related photoemissive properties of Gallium compounds are and have been studied (as for example http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=15306989 ,"Fabrication and properties of gallium metallic photonic crystals", shows).
In the same category one tends to find the Aluminiu-Gallium compounds, such as Al-Ga-P, aluminium-gallium-phosphide, and similarly of course there are variations
combining known gallium compound semiconductors, so also Al-Ga-In-As, Al-Ga-In-P, Al-Ga-In-S, Al-Ga-Ge-Cu-Fe-As-S, etcetera. Seems if you stay in the right
"zone" you can mix any of these similar group compound semiconductors, resulting in slight variations of similar compounds. Of course we are not really looking
for photoactive materials, but the combining aspect is interesting still. For a nice little list of natural minerals that have a composition in this vacinity I suggest
checking out http://www.galleries.com/minerals/sulfides/class.htm and if you look it up, look at Germanite for a handsome candidate. ;)

In conclusion of this post filled with more or less usefull factoids I would like to quote Wikipedia's "Gallium nitride" page:
Quote
Group III nitride semiconductors are recognized as one of the most promising materials for fabricating optical devices in the visible short-wavelength and UV region. Potential markets for high-power/high-frequency devices based on GaN include microwave radio-frequency power amplifiers (such as used in high-speed wireless data transmission) and high-voltage switching devices for power grids. A potential mass-market application for GaN-based RF transistors is as the microwave source for microwave ovens, replacing the magnetrons currently used. The large band gap means that the performance of GaN transistors is maintained up to higher temperatures than silicon transistors.The first Gallium Nitride metal/oxide semiconductor field-effect transistor (GaN MOSFET) was experimentally demonstrated by Weixiao Huang of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in early 2008.

So I'm getting the impression we may have a winning ingredient in our Gallium there, Ian! ;) :D

see you guys later :)

Koen1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: Crystal Power CeLL by John Hutchison
« Reply #357 on: June 11, 2008, 01:19:16 AM »
Hi all :)

brief little update:
- "Quirk" still active ;)
- PC running 14+ day datalogging of 4 cells crashed,
 now under investigation, fearing the worst :-[
- very experimental plate-based cell versions under
construction, several different mold types, got a few mixes in mind :)
- came up with possible way to use thermoelectric effect of different
metals to produce a charge on electrodes of a cell (for 'polarisation'
purposes) while inside a 1000 degree C oven/kiln. ;D
(without need for connection to charge source outside it)
- have developed a desire for Galena, for some odd reason :D
- Rochelle salt based "Hutchison" type cell seems to have gone flat.
  I will have to re-melt the stuff sometime in the near future I guess.
  Will see if I can get a nice high voltage source to charge it this time...
  ... or maybe I should just use my bug zapper, hey Ian? ;) :D
- am considering to mix up a batch with Gallium, Iron pyrite, Iron oxide,
Silver, perhaps a little Germanium, maybe some Gold. Don't know why the
gold, but since I have a little lying around waiting to be used in a mix I might
as well. :) Second mix in consideration: the above, plus a little bit of tin, lead
and bismuth. Got that lying around too, and though I'd be surprised if it did
anything with RS, it might with silicate. Both mixes to be tried with silver sand
and R.salt, and with sand/quartz and silicate base mix. Maybe even with sand
and a little bit of waterglass. :)

All the best
Koen

ian middleton

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 162
Re: Crystal Power CeLL by John Hutchison
« Reply #358 on: June 11, 2008, 11:59:21 AM »
G'day all,

@Koen:  Sorry to hear about your pc, I hope the logger is ok, in this game it is a most valuable piece of test gear.
By shear coincidence I dug out my 2 peltier devices today to see if they would be of any use, it seems Koen you have given
me an idea ( on yer  ;D ).
Nothing wrong with having a desire for galena, I'm quite partial to the stuff myself  ;D ;D

Had a bit of a slack week, basically I've run out of resources. Did however manage to mix up and cook a batch of iron oxide and sulphur in a 1:1 molar ratio. The brittle crystaline mass showed no special electrical properties that I could detect. But may make a good ingredient in a future mix.

The galvanic side of my pyrite cell became painfully obvious when I froze it at -15c for 3 days. The voltage dropped from 1.308V
to 0.898V and the current went awol. :(

How are you other guys getting on? Got any results we can use  :)

See you later

Ian

Koen1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: Crystal Power CeLL by John Hutchison
« Reply #359 on: June 12, 2008, 02:07:15 PM »
G'day all,
G'day mate! ;D (crikey?)

Quote
@Koen:  Sorry to hear about your pc, I hope the logger is ok, in this game it is a most valuable piece of test gear.
Datalogger seems to be fine, which is good, 'cuz it's worth more to me than the entire old laptop. ;)
Still unclear what caused the crash, am running diagnostic program to figure out where the problem was.
Maybe I should install Ubuntu linux on the old laptop and just run the logger software in Xwin...

Quote
By shear coincidence I dug out my 2 peltier devices today to see if they would be of any use, it seems Koen you have given
me an idea ( on yer  ;D ).
Yes yes, you got it. :) Lol only need to give a hint and you pick it up :) My idea was actually
simpler, just thinking of attaching a Nickel plate to the one electrode and an Iron plate to the other, possibly using nickel and
iron wire or direct contact... But of course Peltier elements should contain very nice bimetallic junctions than might be even more
usefull. :) It depends what metals they are and what metal(s) you are using for electrodes. For example, if you're using aluminium
and copper as electrodes you may want to avoid using any of the metals that are positioned in between them in the thermoelectric series,
like titanium, chromium, or tin. But yeah, that's the basic idea. For really high voltages I guess we still need to work something out.
Quote
Nothing wrong with having a desire for galena, I'm quite partial to the stuff myself  ;D ;D
:D

Quote
Had a bit of a slack week, basically I've run out of resources. Did however manage to mix up and cook a batch of iron oxide and sulphur in a 1:1 molar ratio. The brittle crystaline mass showed no special electrical properties that I could detect. But may make a good ingredient in a future mix.
Hmm interesting, so is the compound now iron sulphate? I just happen to have acquired some cobalt sulphate the other week, it is a nice redish orange crystal grain. Nonconductive, and so far
I have not found a very good use for it, but it is apparently used in glazing as a binder... May be worth mixing with some pyrite and galena... ;)

Quote
The galvanic side of my pyrite cell became painfully obvious when I froze it at -15c for 3 days. The voltage dropped from 1.308V
to 0.898V and the current went awol. :(
Aw.  :-\ Well, that's a pity. Then again, a 0.898V static charge is still not bad for a homemade electret,
even if it has zero amps. ;) And although it does indeed suggest galvanic reaction, there is also a chance that there is some pyroelectric effect at play.
Which would obviously also disappear when frozen. But yes, I do get the impression it was galvanic.

And yes, who else is still doing experiments,
and what have you guys managed to come up with? :D