Room-temperature superconductivity?

Point out news stories, on the net or in mainstream media, related to polywell fusion.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

BenTC
Posts: 408
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 4:54 am

Postby BenTC » Mon Jul 12, 2010 3:46 pm

Johan,

Welcome. Sounds like you've had a rough trot. Most of us are not in a position to challenge the physics - though we do the best we can. Most are here as interested spectators in this "out-there" technology.... http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 6673788606 What do you think?

Your website mentions generating room-temp superconducting substrates suitable for electronic chips. How about bulk material for high power conduction - for high power magnets? That would really be of interest. What would be involved in the manufacture of this... http://media.photobucket.com/image/poly ... orulf2.jpg ?
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice there is.

BenTC
Posts: 408
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 4:54 am

Postby BenTC » Mon Jul 12, 2010 3:49 pm

I didn't know about Negative Electron Affinity Diamond, so I found this.
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice there is.

MSimon
Posts: 14310
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Mon Jul 12, 2010 4:32 pm

I have done a post on your work here:

http://iecfusiontech.blogspot.com/2010/ ... hanic.html

and a somewhat abbreviated version for a more general audience here:

http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/201 ... hanic.html

and here:

http://www.classicalvalues.com/archives ... m_mec.html

By the end of the day 3,000 to 5,000 people will have seen the links. By the end of the week 10,000 to 20,000 will have seen it. You can expect that 10% will actually follow the links and read at least the pdf section I linked to.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
http://protonboron.com/
THE OPEN POLYWELL FUSION CONSORTIUM

WizWom
Posts: 371
Joined: Fri May 07, 2010 1:00 pm
Location: St Joseph, MO
Contact:

Postby WizWom » Mon Jul 12, 2010 5:59 pm

Regarding the Ohms law issue: there is zero resistance to the electrons in a vacuum, but the voltage is certainly not 0, nor is current 0.

I have run across many instances of unexplained systems, and radical explanations for them, over the last 35 years at least. Invariably, the people espousing them get relegated to the fringe, and often are denigrated by academia.

My feeling is that if it works, you should make a device which works better than the standard using the effect, and to hell with the academics. Make money with it, and let them explain when they can.
Wandering Kernel of Happiness

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Postby GIThruster » Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:30 pm

I agree with Wiz though I would add that if you have a protectable technology, you'll want to file for patent here in the US right away too. As soon as whatever you have is protected, I would highly recommend you present here below, as this will give you huge exposure to those looking for investment, etc:

http://ias-spes.org/SPESIF.html

This is not a peer review forum but in many ways it's far better. You'd be shocked at the sheer numbers of investors who stalk the halls. . .
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis

DeltaV
Posts: 2245
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 5:05 am

Postby DeltaV » Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:40 pm

Capitalists (and wealthy dreamers) can easily steamroll over intransigent academics, if properly motivated.

If this can be turned into practical, RT superconducting cables, maybe by some sort of continuous CVD process (and I'm certainly no expert), it won't matter what the high priests of physics think. The implications would be on par with practical p-B11 fusion and Mach-Woodward Effect, with nice synergies possible.
Last edited by DeltaV on Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

MSimon
Posts: 14310
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:41 pm

there is zero resistance to the electrons in a vacuum, but the voltage is certainly not 0, nor is current 0.


But there is no voltage drop that causes heating either. Energy is either drawn from or returned to the field. "Resistance" only happens when the electrons contact a "solid" object.

All assuming very low densities where the MFP is much longer than the distance traveled.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
http://protonboron.com/
THE OPEN POLYWELL FUSION CONSORTIUM

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Postby GIThruster » Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:48 pm

If this substrate is easy enough to make and test, rather than pressing first for a wire-like version (which I agree with DeltaV is an extraordinarily useful and potent technology), I would immediately characterize your substrate through as much frequency as possible. One of the troubles with things like YBCO is there has never been enough characterization at high frequency. If however you're looking at room temperature substrates, characterizing them right up into the Ghz range could demonstrate what VAST possibilities exist for future electronics.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis

johanfprins
Posts: 708
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 6:40 pm
Location: Johannesbutg
Contact:

Postby johanfprins » Mon Jul 12, 2010 7:58 pm

quote="BenTC"] Your website mentions generating room-temp superconducting substrates suitable for electronic chips. How about bulk material for high power conduction - for high power magnets? That would really be of interest. [/quote]

Yes this is a different kettle of fish. I cannot do that at present: But I believe thatI I know which materials can be developed to obtain this. Although there is a high probability to do this, I cannot do it in my garage on a pension. Strangely enough, I will need highly competent polymer chemists to cooperate with me.

But even if this proves to be impossible, I have no doubt that superconducting processor chips can be manufactured within a very short time limit (about 2 years): But again NOT in my garage. I cannot create a SAMSUNG or INTEL lab in my garage; no matter how much I wanted to do so over the past 10 years.

johanfprins
Posts: 708
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 6:40 pm
Location: Johannesbutg
Contact:

Postby johanfprins » Mon Jul 12, 2010 8:06 pm

BenTC wrote:I didn't know about Negative Electron Affinity Diamond, so I found


NEA simply means that one has a material with conduction electrons which are higher in energy than they will be when they are outside in the vacuum. Obviously this definition assumes that there is no interface to the vacuum. When there is an interface a dipole layer will form to equilibrate the conduction electrons to the vacuum level. The latter fact has NOT been realised to be true by the Diamond Physics Community for more than 30 years!

johanfprins
Posts: 708
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 6:40 pm
Location: Johannesbutg
Contact:

Postby johanfprins » Mon Jul 12, 2010 8:13 pm

WizWom wrote: My feeling is that if it works, you should make a device which works better than the standard using the effect, and to hell with the academics. Make money with it, and let them explain when they can.

you are 100% correct: But to make a an electtronic device nowadays requires facilities which I do not have in my garage. I have approached institutions which have the facilties, they all believe their "experts" whio claim tha superconduction cannot work this way.

The best I could do is to genertae diamond substrates which can superconduct at room temperature and invite electronics firms to testr these substrates. This invitaion has been on my website for months. So far no takers. What more can I do as a desperately poor retiree?

johanfprins
Posts: 708
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 6:40 pm
Location: Johannesbutg
Contact:

Postby johanfprins » Mon Jul 12, 2010 8:20 pm

GIThruster wrote:I agree with Wiz though I would add that if you have a protectable technology, you'll want to file for patent here in the US right away too. .


The patent has been rolled over for a couple of years. It has now been filed using the International Egreement route. This gives me time until the middle of next year to file in the USA provided that I can get financial support. If not I might have to sell out to China. At least they are interested!

johanfprins
Posts: 708
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 6:40 pm
Location: Johannesbutg
Contact:

Postby johanfprins » Mon Jul 12, 2010 8:25 pm

DeltaV wrote:Capitalists (and wealthy dreamers) can easily steamroll over intransigent academics, if properly motivated.

If this can be turned into practical, RT superconducting cables, maybe by some sort of continuous CVD process (and I'm certainly no expert), it won't matter what the high priests of physics think. The implications would be on par with practical p-B11 fusion and Mach-Woodward Effect, with nice synergies possible.


Yes, it might be possible but NOT in my garage and on my pension-income. In fact if I have not had the oppostion from the superconsuctor physics church over the past 10 years we might already have had these "goodies".

johanfprins
Posts: 708
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 6:40 pm
Location: Johannesbutg
Contact:

Postby johanfprins » Mon Jul 12, 2010 8:35 pm

MSimon wrote:
there is zero resistance to the electrons in a vacuum, but the voltage is certainly not 0, nor is current 0.


But there is no voltage drop that causes heating either. Energy is either drawn from or returned to the field. "Resistance" only happens when the electrons contact a "solid" object.

All assuming very low densities where the MFP is much longer than the distance traveled.


Very good Simon: But this is exactly where Onnes went wrong: He represented his results in terms of resistance while he REALLY measured voltage. Even at present, ZERO resistance has no meaning. The defining characteristic of superconduction is thus that the applied electric field is cancelled as soon as superconduction sets in. THIS is the experimental result that needs to be explained. NOT a single model to date, except the one in my books, can explain how this happens. Thus NOT any of these models can explain superconduction.

So stop defining superconduction in terms of zero resistance until we can define what zero resistance IS. Which previous law is used to define this unknown monster?

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Postby GIThruster » Mon Jul 12, 2010 8:43 pm

Yes well, two things:

first, unless you're ready to fight in the courts for 15 years, leave off early the notion that your discovery or invention will make you wealthy. Most inventors adore this idea enough that it makes them silly for decades and the terrible truth about this issue is that it is the investors who get wealthy--not the inventors. I wish it weren't so but this is true of writers and publishers and producers as well. That's just the way the world is.

In light of this first observation let me make a second. The place to find investors is the US. From DOD (who already have lots of people doing diamond dielectric work) to labs like EarthTech and Intel, there are plenty of places to get attention to your work. First, if you don't want to see it all go bye-bye, is to file for patent. I don't know how your process works, but if it does not secure your rights here in the US, it's not enough.

Once you have a patent, you can present your data at places like SPESIF. I promise, if you have convincing data, you'll get the attention you need. Many savvy investors are willing to entertain the notion that we don't actually understand what most physicists pretend, about things like superconductivity. The rough time you've had is the natural result of ANY AND ALL CHALLENGES TO CURRENT SCIENTIFIC THEORY. Science in fact HAS to be this way or it would be so shifting that we would never have any confidence in it. So the issue is not you, and to circumvent it, you need to find investors who will pay to do the validation studies, IMHO.
Last edited by GIThruster on Mon Jul 12, 2010 9:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis


Return to “News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests