description of cell growth needed? Answered

Nowadays a question arose in my mind.it may sound stupid.animals  and humans take in food and then it is transferred from complex food to simple food.then it is transferred into energy. now i have the following question: 1)what type of energy is this?you know a bit, is this thermal or something something. 2)next if this is enegy a type of non shaped or non matter then does it help in our growth of cells.if it then how . 3)how is this energy helping us to move or do works? so its just out curiosity.thanks for viewing and further answering.bye

Question by argha halder   |  last reply


Hydrogen-powered plane carries human crew for first time.

The first manned, hydrogen-powered plane has been successfully tested in the skies above Spain, its makers say.The small, propeller-driven craft, developed by aviation giant Boeing, made three short flights at an airfield south of Madrid, the company said.It was powered by hydrogen fuel cells, which produce only heat and water as exhaust products.The tests could pave the way for a new generation of greener aircraft, the company said.Boeing's chief technology officer John Tracy said the flights were "a historical technological success" and "full of promises for a greener future".Small futureThree test flights of the two-seater aircraft took place in February and March at an airfield at Ocana, south of Madrid. The plane was modified to include a hybrid battery and fuel cell system used to power an electric motor coupled to a conventional propeller. Hydrogen-powered planes have been flown before, but never with a human pilot onboard.BBC Story

Topic by Kiteman   |  last reply


3 D Printing of BODY PARTS !!!!!

Scientists Use 3D Printer to Create First “Printed” Human Vein   Brit Liggett Scientists Use 3D Printer to Create First “Printed” Human Vein by Brit Liggett, 03/22/10 filed under: Design for Health   3D Printing technology has recently leapt into a new realm — we’ve seen printers that can create entire buildings out of stone, delicious meals out of simple ingredients, and now — perhaps weirdest and coolest of them all — a printer that can build body parts from cells!   Body Part Printer LINK ANOTHER LINK to another more familiar site.... Picture

Topic by Goodhart   |  last reply


Button pusher

I want to build a device that can push a button (such as keyboard, cell phone button, etc) with approximately the same force as a human would once every few seconds automatically. I've done a search, but haven't found a project like this. Has anyone published anything along these lines?

Topic by baggers   |  last reply


How should I write a program to get a phone cal via GSM module if I get positive result with two sensors.

I have developed three codes one for GSM module to receive a phone call,Another for load cell sensor which will give output when a load is placed,and the next for PIR motion sensor if a human is detected. I'm in need of a code that would intimate through a phone call if I get positive resukts both in my load cell sensor and my PIR motion sensor. 

Question by abigailpearlin   |  last reply


i need help about a small mechanism?

Http://i1084.photobucket.com/albums/j417/gada888/needle.jpg I want to design a electromechanical mechanism which is potable and cell powered,a sensor mounted on a tiny plastic circle and the thing is  attached to a shaft end.when started the shaft is slowly thrusting until the sensor on the shaft end is touched human skin the sensor send signal back to a microchip,the chip halt  the thrusting shaft in case it squeeze the skin hard,  next the  NEEDLES around the sensor begin to work, they piercing through the skin then quickly spring out in case they cause much pain to people. question 1:how to design the shaft thrusting mechanism? question 2:is about the needles,how to pull them back quickly? question 3:can it be wireless controlled? pls help,any of ur suggestion would be greatly appreciated.  

Question by gada888   |  last reply


Instructables in Inventors Digest - Five Questions with Eric Wilhelm

Here's my five-question interview with Inventors Digest that appeared in the June 2009 issue:Five Questions With ... Eric WilhelmEric Wilhelm founded Instructables.com, "the world's biggest show and tell" Web site where users crowdsource do-it-yourself or DIY projects, from lawnmower race cars to skateboard sails. The site began in 2005 as a way for Wilhelm to document his mechanical engineering work and grad school kite-surfing projects. He's co-founded Squid Labs, an innovation and design partnership, and a number of Squid Labs spin-off companies including Potenco, producing a human-powered generator for cell phones and laptops; Makani, an energy company seeking to harness high-altitude wind; and OptiOpia, developing low-cost portable vision-testing and lens-fabricating devices. Talked innovation with him in this installment of Five Questions With ...More news and press about Instructables here.

Topic by ewilhelm   |  last reply


Ship of Theseus - Philosophy of Identity

This past saturday there was a show on TV about the advancements in the field of prosthetics and human augmentation. I only watched less than half of it - but the timing was interesting. I came across an article about the Ship of Theseus (from Greek Legend) and have been reading quite a bit about "identity" and similar topics. This is philosophy - so there's really no right answer, but I have found it very interesting to think about and thought I'd share and see what others think.The gist of the story: Say we were to preserve Theseus' ship. As parts deteriorated and rotted away, we replace them with new (better/stronger) parts. Eventually, we replace each part with a new one. The question now is - Is it still the same ship? I'm willing to bet most of you will say yes.Now lets say that instead of replacing the ships components with new ones - we take all of the parts from the warehouse (where the parts are being stored) and reconstruct the ship from these new/better parts. Which ship has the "identity" of Theseus' ship? This is an interesting question because I'm again willing to bet that the "first" ship mentioned is your answer. But why? The parts would have gone to the "first" ship if not into the "second" ship. Why should this be different?Third Case:We take Theseus' ship and we tear it completely down in dry dock. In its place, we reconstruct using new parts. Is it still Theseus' ship?Now lets look at a digital device - my laptop for instance. Let us say that I have an "identical" machine (spec wise) and I cut and paste each file from this hard disk to the "new" machine. Does this "new" machine take the "identity" of the "old?" Can we say this "new" laptop (ship) is in fact Theseus' laptop? Talking with my colleagues - their answer (unanimously) was no - it is not the same.So here is where I get to the human side of things... Biological process have our bodies continuously replicating cells. In about a year, roughly 90% of the cells in your body will die. But no worries - they are continuously replaced with new ones. So, does that mean we are a different person compared to 12 months ago (I've read this question from several sources)? How about amputees? Today, prosthetic limbs can allow them to do what many of us choose not to do - run marathons. Are they any less of what they were before? <-- I know that sounds "wrong" - put put "political correctness" aside (but by no means am I putting down the situation of an amputee).Again, I'm willing to bet many will say yes - we're the same person. One argument is that our memories make our "identity." Fair enough. Now lets entertain the future. We now have the technology to save your memories digitally. We can digitize the human brain preserving its intelligence and thinking ability. Just entertain this idea for a few minutes. So if my brain (and its memories) are now digital and I copy it to another vessel. Is it still me? Do "I" still have the same identity? I'd like to think yes, but what was your answer about copying a laptop's memory (was it no - they are not the same)? Why should my digitized memories be any different than that of a laptop's digitized memory?At this point, my colleagues were floored. They figured out where I was going a few sentences before I said it. That's what makes the topic so interesting (in my opinion).If anyone has ever heard of HAL-5 - you already know what a feat it is. HAL-5 (yes, that's a play off of a space odyssey) is a human exoskeleton designed to assist those whom otherwise would be unable to walk for long periods of time. The user can lift heavy weights (80kg - say a dishwasher) among other helpful tasks. How does it know to move? Sensors on the skin detect electrical impulses in the brain that tell the muscle to react. Those signals are processed and turned into mechanical motion. All of this happens before the muscles have time to move. That is, the machine is moving before you even do.So if we replace our bodies and even our nervous system with mechanical devices - what makes us the same person? AND, are we the same person if we can simply copy ourselves to a new body?So last point - and it's not even my own. One of my colleagues brought this to the table today (literally at the lunch table) :P We were talking about the advancements and the potential/reality of human augmentation. Then he says something that makes complete sense to me. He said that we are at the point where our brain is evolving at a rate faster than our human bodies are. Just give yourself a minute to contemplate and wrap your head around the potential of that statement. To a degree - we have already done this (just not internally). Why else would we fly in a plane or drive a car? Well, I for one sure can't fly or run at 70+mph.1. I apologize for the length.2. I'm curious of your thoughts -- if you have another aspect of this, please do post.3. Remember there is no "correct" answer, this is just philosophy.4. There will always be more question than answers on this subject (at least I think so).HAL-5: http://www.engadget.com/2006/10/29/hal-5-robotic-suit-ready-for-mass-production/HAL-5 (mountain climb): http://www.engadget.com/2006/08/08/hal-robot-suit-almost-summits-with-quadriplegic-man-in-tow/

Topic by trebuchet03   |  last reply


your opinion about the movie district 9

OK i just went and heard the whole plot of Neill Blomkamp masterpiece the Monalisa of movies D9. he was supposed to make the halo movie but Microsoft was complaining its multimillion dollar A$$ off so Neill felling sad thought up remixing his movie Alive in norunburg i think its called. so here this movie is a unsuspecting antagonist "Wikus van Der Merwe" is doing a documentary on MNU moving the Aliens to district 10 but he then goes into a shack and is screwing around with items of none of his concern and sprays a crap-storm virus in his eye that mutates his arm to a alien arm and changes his DNA so he can operate alien machinery MNU being the bastards they are jacks him up and takes him to there base for dissection he then daringly grabs a scalpel and holds a doctor hostage leading up to that he escapes to district 9 where he meets Christopher who at first is reluctant to kick Wikus's A$$ they soon befriend each other they then steal some alien weaponry and launch a counter attack on the MNU mercs were he retrieves a fuel cell to power a ship were Chris finds out that MNU have been experimenting on his people later on Wikus finds out that it would take up to 3 years to turn him back to a human,then a Emnite shamalan twist pops up Chris wants to go home for help before coming back to cure Wikus he then gets angry and kicks poor Chris's A$$ and powers up a ship were his engine is shot up and he crashes he than crawls out. soon cute Christopher's son Little CJ gains control of a mechanized battle suit from inside the crashed shuttle and helps free Wikus, Wikus then enters the alien walker battle suit and defends Christopher as the mother ship uses a tractor beam to lift the shuttle on board.he shuttle docks with the mother ship, Wikus is shot in the back and the walker suit ejects him after taking critical damage. Wikus drags himself away from the leader of the mercenaries, but is unavoidably caught. Just before the trigger is pulled, four aliens burst out of the surrounding slums and rips apart Wikus's attackers.The film concludes with another series of interviews and news broadcasts, showing the humans view on the events that unfolded. An interview with Wikus' wife reveals a small metal rose was left on her doorstep (one of Wikus' trademarks, he strongly believed a gift is worth more if it was made personally). She concludes it couldn't possibly be Wikus, no one has heard from him since he was last seen crawling from the mangled battle suit. An alien is then seen standing in a junk yard inside District 9 fashioning a small metal rose out of scrap metal, implying that Wikus is alive, his transformation from human to alien is complete, and is still awaiting Christopher's promised return. just tell me what you think about the ending

Topic by albylovesscience   |  last reply


Observing single photons (may be future Instructable)

In a thread on building a DIY Geiger counter, I mentioned that it's possible to do an experiment to see single photons directly with your eyes. This is a lab we did when I was an undergraduate, more than 20 years ago. I haven't done the setup myself since then, so I'm just going to describe it; if I have the opportunity run it again, then I'll make an I'ble.If someone else decides to tackle it, please feel free to write it up yourself!The human eye detects light via a family of proteins called opsins. Different forms of photopsins are sensitive to different wavebands, which is what gives us color vision. Rhodopsin is sensitive mainly to greenish-blue light, and provides us with monochromatic night vision. Rhodopsin works by changing its conformation when it absorbs a photon; that change of conformation allows ions to flow through the rod cell's membrane and generate a signal. The signal from each rod cell is processed through the retina and passed to the visual cortex, where a representation of the visual field is constructed.Human rhodopsin has a quantum efficiency of about 25% (there's a 25% chance a single photon will be absorbed and produce the rod-cell signal). By comparison, cat rhodopsin is more than 90% quantum efficient. 25% QE is sufficiently high to be observable -- a source of single photons can be seen by a dark-adpated person with normal vision.You'll need a steady source of well-collimated photons. A green laser pointer (~532 nm) will do nicely. But how many photons does it generate? A wavelength of 532 nm corresponds to 3.53×10-19 joules. So a small 1mW laser pointer puts out 2.8×1015 photons per second (watt = joule/s). How do you reduce that to one photon at a time? With filters. An ND3 neutral density filter reduces the output light by 10-3 compared to the input, so a stack of just five ND3's in front of this laster pointer would result in (on average) just 2.8 photons per second! A stack of four ND4's would give you 0.28 photons/s on average.If you don't have neutral density filters, you can make a decent approximation, by stacking sheets of black trash-bag plastic. To make this work you have to measure the attenuation yourself, so you'll need a photodetector, something which gives an output (voltage, resistance, current, whatever) proportional to the intensity of light.Once you have your single-photon source, you need to set it up in a completely dark room. If you have access to an old-style photographic darkroom, use it. Otherwise, use thick (3-5 mm) black felt and gaffer's tape to seal any windows and doorframes. Put the laser on a table or stand pointed at your face, with the stack of NDs (or trash bags) in front of it. If you're doing this by yourself, you may want to have a piece of tape set up to hold the pointer's button down. Otherwise, your lab partner will take care of it.Sit in the dark for 20 to 30 minutes. This will seem like forever, so you may want something to help you keep track of the time. A standard CD will be about half finished, or you can get through ten pop sons on your iPod, when your eyes become dark adapted.Turn on the laser. You'll see intermittent flashes all coming from nearly the same place in your visual field; if you turn your head, the location will move in the opposite direction. If you've used filters to get down to a few flashes per second, POV will make them easier to see. At less than one photon per second, you'll see them individually.

Topic by kelseymh   |  last reply


Lamarkian inheritance -- not just a straw-man &quot;mistake&quot;?

A new article in Nature reports on research indicating that developmental changes caused by environment can be passed on to offspring. The Universe is always more complex, and more subtle, then the textbooks and dogmatists would have you believe.Lamarkian inheritance is a theory of genetics where animals could pass on traits which they acquired during life. In the typical textbook oversimplification, the examples used are often the giraffe stretching to reach leaves would have children with longer necks; the blacksmith who developed a highly muscled right arm would have childred with bigger right arms; and so on. After the discovery and rediscovery of Mendelian genetics, Lamarkism was more or less ignored (except by Lysenko), leaving only this simplistic and stupid story of a "mistaken idea" in textbooks.There have been a number of discoveries in recent years of heritable traits (in humans as well as in other animals), for which no specific gene, or even combination of genes, could be isolated. The term "epigenetics" refers to the fact that many of our physical traits are driven, not by genes directly, but rather by the complex biochemistry of how, when, and how much genes are expressed. There have been some examples of epigenetic inheritance, but in all those cases, the pattern of gene expression is itself driven by the presence or absence of nearby "triggering" DNA in the genome.This new article is an example where an epigenetic feature driven by enviornmental influence appears to cause changes that can be passed on to offspring. What the mechanism is (i.e., how the pattern of expression gets "stored" in the germ cells) is not clear, but it is very intereresting to see the effect in real life.

Topic by kelseymh   |  last reply


your opinion on the movie district 9 (warning spoiler only read if you want to know the ending) ?

OK i just went and heard the whole plot of Neill Blomkamp masterpiece the Monalisa of movies D9. he was supposed to make the halo movie but Microsoft was complaining its multimillion dollar A$$ off so Neill felling sad thought up remixing his movie Alive in norunburg i think its called. so here this movie is a unsuspecting antagonist "Wikus van Der Merwe" is doing a documentary on MNU moving the Aliens to district 10 but he then goes into a shack and is screwing around with items of none of his concern and sprays a crap-storm virus in his eye that mutates his arm to a alien arm and changes his DNA so he can operate alien machinery MNU being the bastards they are jacks him up and takes him to there base for dissection he then daringly grabs a scalpel and holds a doctor hostage leading up to that he escapes to district 9 where he meets Christopher who at first is reluctant to kick Wikus's A$$ they soon befriend each other they then steal some alien weaponry and launch a counter attack on the MNU mercs were he retrieves a fuel cell to power a ship were Chris finds out that MNU have been experimenting on his people later on Wikus finds out that it would take up to 3 years to turn him back to a human,then a Emnite shamalan twist pops up Chris wants to go home for help before coming back to cure Wikus he then gets angry and kicks poor Chris's A$$ and powers up a ship were his engine is shot up and he crashes he than crawls out. soon cute Christopher's son Little CJ gains control of a mechanized battle suit from inside the crashed shuttle and helps free Wikus, Wikus then enters the alien walker battle suit and defends Christopher as the mother ship uses a tractor beam to lift the shuttle on board.he shuttle docks with the mother ship, Wikus is shot in the back and the walker suit ejects him after taking critical damage. Wikus drags himself away from the leader of the mercenaries, but is unavoidably caught. Just before the trigger is pulled, four aliens burst out of the surrounding slums and rips apart Wikus's attackers.The film concludes with another series of interviews and news broadcasts, showing the humans view on the events that unfolded. An interview with Wikus' wife reveals a small metal rose was left on her doorstep (one of Wikus' trademarks, he strongly believed a gift is worth more if it was made personally). She concludes it couldn't possibly be Wikus, no one has heard from him since he was last seen crawling from the mangled battle suit. An alien is then seen standing in a junk yard inside District 9 fashioning a small metal rose out of scrap metal, implying that Wikus is alive, his transformation from human to alien is complete, and is still awaiting Christopher's promised return. just tell me what you think about the ending

Question by albylovesscience   |  last reply


Nine Points to Consider in Licensing University Technology - A nicer way to patent

Earlier this month, a group of 11 research institutions signed a pledge to take a different approach to licensing intellectual property, titled "Nine Points to Consider in Licensing University Technology". My read of the whitepaper amounts to this: Universities are realizing that their aggressive licensing behavior comes at a cost, and they're toning it down. However, of the nine points, absent in my mind is consideration of the students involved in any licensing deal. For many, graduate school gives the first meaningful introduction to the patent system, and often the first introduction to the system of licensing intellectual property. When a research project turns into a patent, and a patent turns into a startup company with a student in a founding position, the alignment between the student and the university, particularly with what's often called the technology licensing or transfer office (TLO or TTO), ends. Knowing the high failure rate of startups, it's the TLO's job to immediately extract as much value from the startup as possible.During my time there, MIT was no different in this regard, and I went through this process personally with a company based on some of my research as well as seeing the same thing happen to friends. The TLO would approach the negotiations in the same way it would approach negotiations with an established IP giant, like IBM or Intel. The burdens placed on nascent companies were incredible, and included things such as direct cash payments -- things that can increase the chance of failure or require the founders to give up more control to VCs into return for badly needed cash. So, while the whitepaper discusses costs that are, in general, more societal, the aggressive behavior I've witnesses also comes at a cost. My propensity to give to the endowment has been severely impacted. The licensing offices must know that second-time entrepreneurs have a higher success rate, so maximizing the TLO's return comes at an overall cost to the university. My choices in what projects Squid Labs pursued were also impacted. Colin, Saul, and I were all in the same research group while at MIT, so one might think Squid Labs would have pursued projects in printed electronics -- something we spent a combined nine years working on. Not so. Knowing the roadblocks that the TLO would put in front of getting access to those patents, we intentionally went after ideas out of MIT's control. Good thing we did, otherwise I might not have a place to share these thoughts with you!Here's the original article, forwarded to me by my Mom, that brought this to my attention:A Nicer Way to PatentBy Eliot MarshallScienceNOW Daily News7 March 2007Universities have plumbed a rich source of cash in recent years by aggressively patenting and licensing faculty inventions, but some schools now want to set limits on the practice. An elite group--11 top research institutions and the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC)--have signed a pledge to take a kinder, gentler approach to licensing intellectual property. Yesterday, they released principles on the sharing of patented discoveries, urging other universities to follow their lead.The manifesto, drafted at a meeting last year at Stanford University in Palo Alto, California, makes nine key points. First on the list is that universities should not agree to deals that would curtail access to new technology by researchers at nonprofit institutions. In the past, for example, biologists complained that Harvard University granted a company too much control over its patented "oncomouse," an animal designed to be cancer-prone (Science, 17 May 2002, p. 1212). This impeded its use in research, some claimed. In other points, the guidelines say that universities should steer clear of deals that give one licensee highly exclusive control of a discovery; that they should avoid making claims on "future improvements" of a discovery; and that they should take into consideration the special needs of "neglected patient populations or geographic areas." The specific issue that led to the drafting of these principles, according to physicist Arthur Bienenstock, former dean of research at Stanford and an organizer of the Palo Alto meeting, was a flurry of concerns about license restrictions on the use of human embryonic stem cells from the University of Wisconsin, Madison. The university's technology manger, the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (WARF) initially required some university-based researchers to take out a restrictive commercial license. After many objected, WARF dropped the policy (Science, 26 January 2007, p. 449).WARF's director, Carl Gulbrandsen, acknowledges that the stem cell licensing requirements caused a backlash. But he says Wisconsin has never sued a university or a researcher over a patent license disagreement. And he praises the new Palo Alto licensing guidelines--which WARF itself has endorsed--although he notes they are "very broad" and nonbinding. Gulbrandsen adds: "We have been following most if not all of these policies" for many years.What impact will the new document have? AAMC Senior Vice President David Korn, who helped draft it, concedes that the guidelines are "a bit arcane" but hopes they create "a buzz" among university patent officers at their annual meeting in San Francisco this week. Korn says the position statement will remind everyone that university licensing deals should "always be guided by the public interest."

Topic by ewilhelm   |  last reply


Robo-Goat Lives - At least I hope he Will

OK here goes. I work at zoo and I am a self taught geek, (mainly old school). I recently volunteered for a project mainly because I'm too stupid to know that it's not possible :~) Purpose of the program/project To - Engineer, Design and Build an Animatronic Robot Goat for: a Cheetah Conservation Fund in Kenya, Africa. This device will replicate a live goat in: size; appearance; movement; sound and smell (smell supplied by others), that can withstand the sever conditions of the desert, durable, possibly solar powered and easy to transport, setup and operate. Note: Up until this point real goats have been tried but they have not been too successful. They were either too stressed or they were stolen for by locals their meat. Objective(s): To lure Cheetahs into an area and enticement them into a cage trap with a simulated live goat (Robo-Goat), to provide a safe humane and ethical capture of wild cheetahs so that recently acquired state of the art GPS/Cellular tracking collars can be placed on them to help gather information to preserve this endangered animal. Analog Radio Tracking Collars have provided the only way to gather much of the information for many different wild animals. Radio Tracking style of the past has always been a difficult and time consuming endeavor, with old style tracking, large heavy radio collars that broadcast a ”beep” continuously, must be tracked with specialized hand-held radios and yagi antennas. All this to locate an animal being studied. Many times you would have to get close enough to disturb the animal just to find out where it is and then try to track it. Obviously not good “normal behavior” data gathering. The new GPS/Cellular systems track the animal in real time and send back data coordinates on the animals location, elevation, speed and direction as it travels. This GPS information is sent via cell towers, (yes they have them in Africa), to a computer that logs and graphs the movements. The research gathered through these efforts may provide the answers to saving these endangered animals. Project design/methods: #1. Establish parameters Record video & audio movements and sounds of normal & panicked goats Research and study movements and demonstrate what mechanical requirements will be necessary to replicate the minimum needed movements - [DONE]. {Raise and lower head; Look left and right; open/close mouth} Determine movement engine {I'm not sure here} {All of the movements are really axial in nature} {At first I was thinking motors but then there are end stops, control systems, ect. To deal with} {next I'm considering solenoids for the low energy requirements and simple full scale movements, except you cant control the speed} {But now I am becoming fixated on model airplane actuators for low weight, low noise and appendage like joints and accessories} {then I ran across "pager motors" and how they are small powerful and inexpensive some how I don't know where to begin} {can you tell this is all still up in the air?} Throw distance & Speed of movement - [DONE]. {Raise and lower head = 90 degrees of arc from base of neck = 5 seconds max} { Look left and right = 90 degrees of arc from left to right with return to normal center point half way = full movement l-r = 2 seconds max i hope} {open/close mouth = 45 degrees of arc from lower jaw = 1 second max} Repetition rate & pattern {random if possible} Determine audio requirements - [DONE]. {this is easy but requires playback trigger synchronized with mouth} The Cosmetics: Determine body and outer skin requirements – [Engineering]. {aluminum wire frame mesh} {foam sculpted head for low mass} {foam wrap suit for body & legs for low mass} {tyvek skin, airbrushed or penned for low mass} {stainless steel / nylon joints for low mass} DB level of normal and panicked goats - [DONE] {I have determined audio system requirements} Determine control system requirements {clueless at this point} Determine power requirements {I'm thinking deep cell marine battery and solar panels to retain charge autonomously} {amp hour rating for battery and solar charging circuit TBD after R&D; tests} {if solar is not feasible them battery exchange schedule TBD} #2 Acquire all electronic and mechanical parts #3 Create mechanicals Fabricate lightweight frame and skeleton structure. Assemble motion joints and motion engine Assemble and test motor functions Determine estimate of MTBF for spare parts, if any #4 Create & install sound system Edit custom audio media for both normal & panicked goats Utilize 12v Solid State Audio Playback Unit # 5 Create Control System #6 R&D; Testing Test charging and power circuit Final assembly #7 Final test Any help to provide suggestions to get me started on the type of engines would be great. tia

Topic by sharpfocus 


HELP - Energy production idea needing some tips and tricks

Good day to allI'm not quite sure this is the right forum for this so bear with me if it's not :PI'm looking for some info and ideas regarding a project that has been brewing in my head, but since i am no more than an initiate in all this mech and tech stuff i figured this would be a good place to find some help.I'm trying to create a low budget way to feed a 12v battery without having to use solar, hydric or wind power. Basically i want not to be dependant on atmosferic conditions so i wanted to use human generated mechanical thrust to generate enough electricity for some basic stuff. This project is to be put inside a yurt in the middle of a forest so one can have a few hours of light and maybe even enough power to charge a small laptop or a cell phone.This is my idea:I thought of using one of these old sewing tables connected to a small motor(instead of a sewing machine) in order to generate electricity which would then be stored in a battery , more or less the same process by wich a dynamo powers a bike's lamp but in a different scale.But to achieve this i still have many questions and doubts that i'm going to share with you all in the hope that some bright ideas might help me bring the project to life.-Question 1 I'm thinking the system should be composed of: Sewing table (Mechanical thrust) Motor (Generator) Some sort of electric rectifier (same function as the ones used with solar systems) 12v Battery Is this looking logical or have i missed something??-Question 2.a What kind of motor is suitable for energy production? I've been reading about this and if i understood right there are 2 kinds of motors. One kind that uses pre generated electric current to magnetize a coil wich in turn produces motion and another kind wich is built with permanent magnets. This later one would be the one i'm looking for, am i right?? Or could it be that not all PM motors can be used to produce energy from motion??-Question 2.b What kind of apliances use this kind of motors? I've just openned a broken vacuum cleaner to check it's motor but it has 2 sets of coils and no magnets, so i'm guessing it is the kind that needs electricity to magnetize one of the coils... LOW BUDGET is a key factor of this project and recycling the motor would be perfect.-Question 3 What about the rectifier... I'm guessing i should have some kind of apparatus which would normalize the energy that is going into the battery and also that prevents me from emptying the battery in order to preserve it. I'm wondering if a regular box like the ones used on solar systems would do the trick...-Question 4 I realized that these table's wheels can spin in both directions, and i'm guessing that this will have some kind of influence on the polarity of the energy produced by the engine and that this might pose some problems. Is this true?? And in case it is, any chance that the rectifier takes care of this or do i need to find a way to force the wheel to spin in only one direction?I still have many other questions but these are probably the bigger ones.I hope someone might help me with all this.Thank you very much in advance.

Topic by dameluz   |  last reply


Eric Wilhelm wins TR35 Innovation Award

Sharing your projects and ideas on Instructables is now officially a Big Idea. Eric just won the TR35 award for top innovators under 35 from MIT's Technology Review magazine for his work with Instructables; check out the press release below, and read about the other winners.I'm pretty psyched to be part of this site, as we're clearly doing something exciting and important -- it's especially neat to be an early adopter with the power to change the way society works.-- ChristyProject-Sharing Website Creator Named Top Young InnovatorSan Francisco, CA - August 19, 2008 -- Eric Wilhelm has been recognized by Technology Review magazine as one of the world's top innovators under the age of 35 for creating Instructables.com, the Internet's #1 project-sharing website.Instructables.com began as a way for Eric to document his engineering work and grad-school kitesurfing projects, and has evolved into a world-wide hub for documenting and sharing creative projects. The site's simple, elegant step-by-step format provides an intuitive platform that allows anyone to publish their project, complete with pictures, text, and embedded video.In a world of mass-produced culture, hand-making and personalizing is experiencing a resurgence, and people everywhere are reviving classic skills and technologies. Instructables is the hub of this movement, providing a social and interactive environment to demonstrate amazing projects and ideas. The site dramatically lowers the barrier to sharing projects, enabling crafters, modders, engineers, artists, cooks, bicyclists, and techies to gather and share their work freely, and where cross-pollination is actively encouraged."Everyone wants to be a creator, not just a consumer," Eric explains. "We bring passionate people together to learn from each other. Instructables makes it cool to be smart." Instructables is also a valuable educational resource. Parents and teachers rely on Instructables as a source of project ideas, and students maintain their personal portfolios at the site. By coupling old-fashioned tinkering with thoughtful discussion and long-distance collaboration, Instructables has begun to revolutionize learning and innovation.Eric Wilhelm and the other TR35 winners for 2008 will be featured in the September issue of Technology Review magazine and honored at the EmTech08 Conference. "The TR35 honors young innovators for accomplishments that are poised to have a dramatic impact on the world as we know it," said Jason Pontin, editor in chief and publisher of Technology Review magazine, "We celebrate their success and look forward to their continued advancement of technology in their respective fields."About Eric Wilhelm:Eric earned his SB, SM, and Ph.D. degrees in mechanical engineering from MIT, where he developed methods to print electronics and micro-electromechanical systems using nanoparticles. He co-founded Squid Labs, an innovation and design partnership, and a number of Squid Labs spin-off companies including Potenco, producing a human-powered generator for cell phones and laptops; Makani, an energy company seeking to harness high-altitude wind; OptiOpia, developing low-cost portable vision-testing and lens-fabricating devices; and Instructables, a collaborative how-to site that helps people document and share a process or skill. See Eric's How To Start A Business Instructable for the more detailed story.About Instructables.com:Instructables is the most popular Do It Yourself community on the Internet. Started in August 2005, Instructables provides accessible tools and publishing instructions to enable passionate, creative people to share their most innovative projects, recipes, ideas, and hacks. The site is currently home to over 14,000 projects covering such diverse areas as crafts, art, kids, electronics, pets, bikes, cars, robotics, green projects, and cooking.About Technology Review, Inc.:Technology Review, Inc., an independent media company owned by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, is the authority on the future of technology, identifying emerging technologies and analyzing their impact for leaders. Technology Review's media properties include Technology Review magazine, the oldest technology magazine in the world (founded in 1899); the daily news website TechnologyReview.com; and events such as the annual EmTech Conference at MIT. ContactsFor Instructables:Christy Canida, 510-931-5622press (at) instructables (dot) comFor Technology Review:Sarah Mees, 978-208-1499press (at) technologyreview (dot) com More news and press about Instructables here.

Topic by canida   |  last reply


Instructables in the New York Times - In a Highly Complex World, Innovation From the Top Down

Instructables, and my Purple Shoes got a nice mention in the New York Times here.In a Highly Complex World, Innovation From the Top Downby G. PASCAL ZACHARYUSER-GENERATED content - from Wikipedia to YouTube to open-source software - is generating waves of excitement. But the opening of innovation to wider numbers of people obscures another trend: many of the most popular new products, like the iPod, are dominated by a top-down, elite innovation model that doesn't allow for customization."New technologies are becoming so complex that many are beyond the possibility of democracy playing a role in their development," said Thomas P. Hughes, a science and technology professor at the University of Pennsylvania.Consider: Electronic implants into human bodies; gene-splicing as common as cosmetic surgery; computer networks mining vast databases to discern consumer preferences. All of these innovations are the result of corporate or government initiatives overseen by elites."The process of innovation leaves out a huge proportion of the population," said Daniel Sarewitz, director of the Consortium for Science, Policy and Outcomes at Arizona State University.To be sure, experts like Eric von Hippel, a management professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, argue that the proliferation of "user-generated" designs signals the "democratizing" of innovation. Armed with inexpensive digital tools and networks, ordinary people, he says, can band together to push their own innovations. They also can hijack existing technologies, taking them in directions only dimly envisioned by the original creators.One example is an electronic community called Instructables whose participants share methods for customizing standard products in unpredictable ways. The chief of Instructables, Eric J. Wilhelm, who earned his doctorate at M.I.T., where he was inspired by Mr. von Hippel, has posted a clever means of turning a white Asics Gel-Foundation 7 running shoe into a purple model. (The $90 official version comes only in a white-black-and-blue combination.)Today's Web-savvy consumers "expect innovations to meet their needs," Mr. Wilhelm says. "If innovation isn't tailored to them, they expect to be able to tailor it to themselves. That is a big change."But does this really mean that elites no longer sit at the top of the innovation food chain?"Elites have a lot of leverage but less than they used to," says Peter Leyden, director of the New Politics Institute in San Francisco. "More people are getting their voices heard." Mr. Leyden sees an emergent American "republic of innovation," where growing numbers of people influence what innovations are made and when.Skeptics, however, say that the rosy scenario is exaggerated and that user-generated innovation is merely a kind of "democracy lite," emphasizing high-end consumer products and services rather than innovations that broadly benefit society."Difficult questions are going unasked about who is participating in innovation and on what terms," says James Wilsdon, director of the innovation program at Demos, a think tank in London.In that scenario, needed innovations can be overlooked. For example, huge amounts of money are spent on improving Web search engines or MP3 players, while scant attention is given to alternative energy sources. Battling diseases like AIDS or Alzheimer's - efforts that lobbying groups in wealthy countries help highlight - attract legions of well-financed innovators, while big global killers, like childhood diarrhea and sleeping sickness, are ignored.Popular pressure to pursue certain innovations sometimes gets results, of course. In 2004, voters in California passed a law lavishly funding a stem-cell research institute - in a rebuke to the Bush administration, which has banned federal funding for such research. "This was a great example of a democratic adjudication of an innovation issue," Mr. Sarewitz of Arizona State said. Even so, bureaucratic and legal delays have meant a slow start for the San Francisco lab, which has not yet received approval to spend any of the $3 billion in promised taxpayer funds.The California example suggests that the balance between expert leadership and mass influence is hard to achieve. The underlying complexity of many innovations demands an ever-rising technological literacy from the public, and yet such an outcome "is a dream that will not likely come to pass," insists Mr. Hughes, a visiting professor at M.I.T.For all the hoopla over the power and promise of user-generated content, consumer-directed design and other hallmarks of our new golden era of democratized innovation, one of the iconic products of our times - the iPod - can't be customized (no, I'm not counting putting on different-colored protective jackets). There is an unbroken line between Henry Ford (with his Model T) and Steve Jobs. The new iPhone similarly reflects the elite, corporate innovator's drive to find one size that fits many.The cliche that committees can't create great ideas, or art, still seems to be true - though whether or not that is the best way to innovate remains an open question. Who knows how much longer?

Topic by ewilhelm   |  last reply


Repulsine - the great mystery...

Even before the repulsine saw some attention during WW2 there were sightings of what we know call the classic UFO shape.Be it in Austria, Poland or other places in Europe, people reported weird disk like thing with a dome flying around.What leaked in images and documents after the war shoed that the repulsine looked basically identical to what people saw as a UFO in the sky over big parts of Europe.Then again, the repulsine appearently never made it a usable stage, same for most jet fighters at the time and still they flew around...If we now just take it for granted that actual test flights really happened back then you might wonder why we did not see any after the war anymore.For most critics it is a simple sign of facts and "confirms" that the replusine might have been a nice idea but never anything that really left the ground.As said, I often like to dig deeper and in this case the digging took far more years than what I planned on.I can not provide any solid proof for the following but I am sure even a sceptic will come to similar conclusions after reading it.Try to find some "eye witness" reports from people who saw the so called "Roswell UFO".Yes the one that made Area51 so secret and famous...Reports can be boiled down to some essential features of the hull, for those who saw it proof that it is alien.Three distinct round shpes on the underside, like you add the bottom of an egg to a round disk.Said disc of the bottom was also shaped like a wing, or the flying disk toys our kids like to play with.On the other side the shape grew up like a half shphere with an added cone or round top on it.On these area they claimed to have see engine outlets or similar and appearently the top cone was spinning in another direction than the rest of the UFO.Now I am no expert for Roswell but if I leave area and time out then I could have been fooled to think these people discribed exactly the same thing people saw a few year eariel flying over Europe.The Roswell UFO was not from another world, just stolen from the looser of a really bad war.What was seen was a working Repulsine, be it an original or something the US created from the 5 prototypes that disappeared after the war.Ha, ha, good one, then why don't we saw them flying after this anymore?Well, for starters it was a testflight gone wrong.Presumable it was planned to be limited to Area51 but the pilot lost control.Considering the Nazies appearently did their best to kill everyone involved in the project before the aliies arrived it is no big surprise.What that test flight would have shown is the impossible manouvers people already witnessed over Europe.90° or more turns at full speed instead of making a turn like a plane, sudden changes in alitude as well as accelleration on a level that makes even modern rockets blush.And if it really was the first bigger testflight they did it explains the big secrecy about the Roswell incident and what followed and created Area51 as we knew it.A "weapon" capable of these things would mean total dominance and options to impove planes and more.So why did they not even do that - or did they?The repulsine was created based on what we call today fringe- or pseudo- sience.If there is only one peroson, or a few that can even understand the claimed working principles that it can't be science as we know it.So, lets take a look what things were already heavily used in the repulsine that "we" claim to have developed or discovered decades later.Coanda effect.When air travels over a surface then it will follow the surface.You can try this with paper strips and blowing on them as well as a stream of water and some shaped objects.Long known but never found any real use until the military picked it up.For example air inlets were then developed to utilise the coanda effect.Remember how a lot of them these days look like a ducted fan housing?The round and slightly conical shape of the inlet will actually act like an airfoil and provide lift - of pulls forward in the direction of the air flow direction of the engine.I supercars we use it to create more downforce and better aerodynamics.Venturi effect.Again a very old one but funny enough also a major factor to make a jet engine work.Tesla turbine.In the Repulsine the rotating copper disks acted like a huge Tesla turbine by using a similar effect.The space between the disks got smaller and smaller towards the outer perimiter.Due to the fast rotation the molecules were accelerated and this created a partial vacuum.We use these principles today for specail vacuum pumps but also in military applications.Harmonics.Without harmonics and resonance the Repulsine would have been impossible.And at a first glance it seems we never made any use from that bit of the machine.Then why do we design exhaust systems in such a way than already the extractors ensure a pump like action and controlled backflow?The sound a good exhaust makes is also based on using the harmonics created by the explosions in the cylinders and expanding gasses.We learned that it is far more efficient to use harmonics and resonance in an exhaust system from somehwere ;)Plasma.The repulsine was said to have emitted a bright glow during certain movements or speeds.To create plasma we need a lot of energy, not so much however if the plasma is a by-product anyways.We learned that a high enough voltage differencial in a vacuum can create a nice plasma arc.From there things like analog TV monitors were created.But we never made anything that creates plasma for any use in an atmosphere.Well, unless you start to check supersonic rocket engines and other things.The working principle is very, very close here in some applications like the ramjet.Vortex energy.Today we see all vortex energy stuff as a free energy scam or at best a waste of time.But from the inlet to the outlet the entire Repulsine utilised what we now know as vortex energy, vortex math and so on.The air is twisted and spun around so many times that it is hard to keep track - but it always happened in a harmonic and resonant fashion.In some way this is implepemented in very expensive cars to keep the ventilation system almost silent even at full power.If you ever take an expensive car apart you might wonder why the air system is not as smooth and straight as you would have expected to get this silence ;)There is more but the list would become too long ;)So, if the repulsine was really that great then why was it taken apart to only utilise fractions of it in other things?If you have something really great that combines a lot of things then no one would suspect if you "developed or discovered" some of it in other projects.And to give you a very bad comparison for the other way around:If you know how to combine a petrol engine with some long blades then you could fly!I know, we did that already but you get the point.I can give you a motor and blades but that would not mean you could build a plane or even helicopter!At that time and still today something like a Repulsine would upset the "balance of power".If claims are correct then the engines of the repulsine were only required to provide the enrgy for directional changes or speed but it flew on "free energy" as the main engine system.In lame words like a jumbo jet that only needs a small engine for the hydraulics and electricity...Another big problem is the replication even if you would have a complete and working model to disect.You see most parts were brazed or welded as screw or rivets would have been problematic in certain areas.Other parts like the Kudo horn like intake systems would even today pose a challenge if you want to replicate them 100% correct.And if your understanding of science and physics greatly differs from those who originally created the thing...If your understanding tells you a dice has 6 sides (we all know that) but in my understanding it would have 16 then you would never understand how my dice rolls ;)Bringing true free energy of any form into this world is only allowed if someone can still make good money from it.Just check solar cells and wind generators - we all can have them but our providers make sure they have enough of them as well ;)Will we ever see a fully working Repulsine again?Of course !Some people like old cars, some collect old planes or old machines and tools.A great project for people in the right trades is always to build thier own little steam engine.So to say as a reminder of how it all started.Same will happen with the Repulsine as the first really utilised free energy machine the world had.The war and killings were not what really scared the world.This happened and will happen over and over again to various extends.Really scary was once certain people realised what might happen if over there the war would end with a victory and people would have time to develop for peaceful things instead.Without the war or this idiot Hitler a peaceful war would have taken over the world by storm.Those making sure we know nothing else but paying for our fuel and energy would have lost their monoply.Times change though...We destroyed our world with our needs for fossil fuels and electricity.What is left we destroy by chopping it down, digging it out or just by building new estates on prime farm land.People are now more desperate then ever to find ways to reduce their energy bills or enviromental impact.Otherwise Google wouldn't make billions on all the fake free energy videos out there.But what would it take to recreate the Repulsine?The person able to come up with the understanding of at least attempting to build one again would need to have certain qualifications and titles.He or she would hold a Nodel price for completing some of our known laws of physics or for finding some of the still missing ones.It would be a quite hard to understand and like person too, maybe even highly autistic.The person would also have an addiction like need to complete things, add the missing bits.And of course a totallydifferent understanding on how nature and the universe work.David T. from England is such a person, or at least the closest mankind can offer so far.He can see math in his head as shapes and images.Complex math problems appear to him like developing landscapes in high detail.He even learned to speak icelandic fluently within 7 days!!Imagine such a person would develop an interest in the old pioneers like Schuberger, Newman, Tesla and so on?Where we normal people fail to see any relevance or connection a guy like David would be able to literally see how all these inventions and ideas connect.He would be able to SEE the math behind it!Knowing how something was supposed to work and combining what is known through patents, drawing, videos or reports would enable such a person to make conclusions.For example where we might just see a nice pattern when we throw a stone into an undsturbed lake such a person would also already know and see the corresponding math the created the waves and why they were created exactly like this.Assuming David has no real interest in such things, then is it possible others already try?Sadly yes and even worse they do it with kids.Learning methods that are different can bring great results.For example while we use a calculator for big numbers some kids attend really strict and performance based classes to do this with an ancient abacus!After years of hard and often painful training they are able to it with a small abacus that only has a single row of discs.Shortly after they graduate to a virtual abacus - they only twitch their fingers in the same motions they would use on the real thing, but the disks and rods are all just visualised in their heads.That however is all meant as an improvement and the kids do it because they want to and not because they are forced to.Like learning to be a chess champion before even being old enough to work...In china however we have a very selective education program.Kids are not just trained slightly different to our kids but also closely monitored on their progress.As soon as one stands out for some skill it is subject to examination.Being well above average here means it is an opportunity for the kid and the parents - on paper at least.We in the western world would see it as a viscious circle though.Over the years china developed not only a better understanding of how these special kids brains actuall do their things but also how to create tests for this purpose.What looks like impossible or nonsense to most kids will trigger a scecific response and understand in those that are special.We would create something that allows parents to know early on where the kid has really good skills and what activities should be promoted.In china though the parents receive a nicer flat or some additional income while kids are send to a far away school.Again we would refer to such a school more as a boot camp.Discipline is at least on military levels, same is the punishment system.In most cases families are not reunited for many years, phone or even video calls only happen in the rare times when western TV crews are allowed a sneak peak.I just say: If a kid would see the parents often enough then it would not only know what to talk about but also be happy to talk to them - this however you won't see.It is like they talk to some distant uncle or such.What is really scary though is how these kids are trained to see their purpose and how important it is to be the best in what they do.Imagine you lost your kid at an early age and the only thing you got over the year was letters from the government saying how well it is doing and that you can be proud of it.Then it graduates and you are not even allowed to be there on that day...After that the kid is gone for good, you get a new flat and your proud kid supports you with some nice extra income.You don't get to know where it is working, what it is doing or if it might just be attending some university.By any standards these graduated kids can be seen as a great number of genius young people.Math, music, languages, science, you name it and they will have the experts aged below 20 for it.But what do they do once school is finnished and life starts?So far no reporter or family was able to figure it out.Means they don't appear in some high profile company, they don't start a successful business or teach at any public or private school.I leave it up to your imagination where thausands of kids find secret employment once they graduated....If, at least in theory we could be able to understand all these old technologies then why don't we at least try?Everyone has a goal, some desire a happy family and nice house, other need fame or just money to be happy.With that comes greed.You might have a really nice car but that does not mean you would give to some neighbour for a trip.Even if it just a nice rose garden, you might not want to share the views with anyone.This is true on all levels and we created a term for it "Need to know basis".If you just operate a press in a factory then you don't need to know when or what the next job is that comes for your press.You will know when it arrives and can check the documents attached.You don't need to know that your council is expanding and it is only seen as a courtesy to let you know on some notice board or in the local newspaper.And even our government does the same.What we do from the first days of our new baby we do on all other levels in the same way.What the baby does not need to know we won't tell or show.But we provide all the littly anklebiter needs to develop and be happy.Changing nappies, feeding, proving comfort when sick or having a nightmare.Later we teach language and other skills like walking.It goes on as you know...Humanity as a whole is like a little kid as well.If we would know all the little, dirty secrets then we would riot and go mad.Things that are of no concern are nothing we need to worry about, so we don't get to know them either.Knowing how build the latest fighter jets is seen as a thing that would give a possible enemy an advantage.Makes a lot of sense to everyone as these things might have to protect us one day.The questions that remain are:If humainty is a child, then how old are we now or when do we graduate?If there is a collection of secret and old knowledge then who owns and controls it?What would it take to force the release of all the things people actually created for a better world and not to be locked away?As funny as it might sound but one answer to all these questions would be to do nice orund trip in your Repulsine.Fly over ever single country in this world.Let their guided missle and what not chase you and once enough show then how quickly you can make a 180° turn to get behind them.So called unimportant countries might ignore you and the people only enjoy a nice show.Those powerful enough will fear you and think it was "the other side" showing their superiority.Once done with your round they all will have to realise there is a new power that is at the helm now: Knowledge and understanding.No more secrets, a repulsine for everyone who wants the plans to build one.A new world would start.Ever thought about that when wondering why all these "Aliens" we see in their ships in our skies never land to say hello ? ;)Even if they would be Aliens and not just some human pilot in some experimental craft:Shouldn't this demonstration of absolute power and control without any violence tell us something?The Repulsine need to come back to life to end all this UFO nonsense and Alien theories out there.You hear the sounds, see the ligh show and impossible abilities.And suddenly most if not all UFO sightings would have a common factor again.Just because the Repulsine is claimed to be lost and that it never actually worked despite film evidence showing the opposite does not mean there is no one using the technology.A working Repulsine available to everyone would also kill the doubt on so many other old inventors and "fringe" scientists.Science and physics would need to be redifined as would be able to find a lot of missing links.I know there is not only a lot of people out there trying to get what they can about the Repulsine but also that there are others who try to prevent this.You have a really easy time getting permission examine some old and histrically important artefact from a museum than getting just a hands on approch for what remains of the Repulsine in various places.Not even decent 3D scans will be allowed.Anything like just getting a tiny pipe cam inside is rejected with the excuse it could cause damage.If the thing is a hoax and never worked then why would it be so important to never touch or move it? ;)I recently got word that two of the remaining Repulsine "artefacts" were examined by the same group of "scientists".This happened in the late 80's and said scientists were claimed to have had acces to a collection of spare parts for the original Repulsine that was lost after the war.A private collector was also mentioned who denied all access but what he had in a secure storage facility appearently disappeared shortly after his refusal.Putting all the dots and hints together it would mean that someone in the late 80's was able to get literally everything that is left of the project in his hands.Those who claimed to have seen these scientists working on the Repulsine leftovers claim they used top notch technology to do so, including 3D scanners - and those were basically imossible to get back then for any uni out there...The laptops used were said to use touchscreens and were connected to all sorts of equippment.And they did it in almost total silence, like a group who studied a performance many times and knew exactly what do when and where without the need of many words.Professional in examining something unknown all all possible levels.I was unable to get any information on these scientist or who they worked for.But if you are one of them and readin this then I would love to hear from you!

Topic by Downunder35m   |  last reply


The future of "mobile" energy...

Right now our current standard is still to use LI-Ion batteries when it comes to rechargable and power demanding devices.We all want more power for our phones, laptops or battery powered tools on the job.And we also want to be able to charge our batteries faster and faster.Back in the old days a D-Cell like lead acid battery in a flashlight was good for about 3 hours until it started to dim a bit.With up to 4 batteries inside they were not just heavy but also quite hazardous.Chargin was usually done over night and you just hoped they were not blowing up while charging.I spare you the other types that came after and that we still use as they all have their good and their bad sides.If we trust our marketing experts than quite soon we will only have electric cars on our roads and battery the size of a suitcase shall be able to run your car for hundreds of miles.The ideas of graphite based batteries or those using crystals and their forming reactions are all great and promising.Some will certainly make it to the consumer in a few years.The one thing that we are never told though is where all the energy to charge those batteries is supposed to come from.Replacing the combustion engine with electric motors is one thing but if no fossil fuel is used....Energy does not come out of thin air!Right now a lot of countries already struggle to provide a reliable power supply grid and distribution network.If you ever enjoyed a scorching hot day during a blackout caused by everyone using too much electricity you know what I mean...The population is growing as fast as the energy demand for our industries.Solar and wind are well and good but without proper storage solutions of not real use because no one can really predict how much they can produce.You know, weather and such things...If we trust our so called experts than all will come together really nice.By the time we have really powerful batteries we will have enough alternative energy supply chains up and running to keep them charged.I have a few issues with this entire concept, so let's see what other people have to about this:Imagine you have a nice and big cabin somewhere really remote and beautiful - but with no electricity for miles.Obvious solution for the modern hunter or nature lover is to invest into free energy.Free because that is how your solar, battery and inverter system would be advertised.You buy the stuff and after that all the electricity comes for free - the things pays for itself!Reality is a bit off though as you need to maintain and replace the costly batteries over time and such things.All this however totally changes for a residential home.Getting a huge solar system on your roof is no problem.Getting off the grid next to impossible.You see, once (or even before) you sign up for an electricity contract it is defined that your home is in a residential area.This brings certain limitations like the requirement to connect ot gas (if available), water, sewage and electricity.Only way to enjoy your "free" energy is by getting a good deal with your supplier.Some countries do it differently but around here it goes like this:Whatever you use still comes right off the grid.That is because your solar system really struggles to cope with load changes and providing surplus back to the grid.And since your meter is not capable ofworking properly with it either...To make it "fair" it is metered how much you use and how much you supply.Most companies here even do this on at least an hourly base - just to fair...For your bill the amounts are then adjusted.What you supplied is taken off.Sadly in most cases going negativ is not an option - if you provide more than what you use only your supplier is laughing.To make things worse what you supply is valued far lower than what you get from the grid.Often the difference is above 20%.Control....Around here quite a few people basically covered house, shed, carport and all with solar panels.This was while we had a great subsidy from the government to go solar...After now over three years most of these people still struggle to get anywhere near even for their investment.Without the grants the timeframe to break even was estimated to be around 12 years - which is about the time for when you need to replace the lot anyway and start over.Some do get nice savings on their bills though but families with kids not so much...If you have little to no chance to get your investment back before you have to replace it, then it is not really that much of a good deal after all.Imagine in town with hundreds of small houses everyone would be able to get the same money back for the electricity they provide...Pay 18 cents per kWh from the grid and get 18 cents perkWh for what you supply and once you provide more than you use you get money back.The providers won't allow this to happen as it means they not just loose some money but also they would lose control.How could they justify another price hike?How could they explain the blackouts?Why should tey pay you at all... ;)If a city with enough open and unused space would decide to go solar on a huge scale and while add also add a lot wind turbines....Someone would need the electricity provided and someone need to step in for those times where demand is above supply.Here the old triangle of power goes into full swing....You see a city or town would need also need a sub station to handle the electricity and to distribute it to the town houses, shops and so on.Funny thing is that only a "provider" can do such things.Doing it privat is usually only possible in really remote areas, like big mining outposts that just have no other option than using generators or solar/wind.And in most areas a town or city is no longer allowed to be a provider of electricty - at least not in the drirect form.Buying in bulk is no problem, having your own supply system however is not in the books.Right now most, if not all the big wind and solar farms are owned and operated by energy providers.There is billionaires everyhwere who could build a solar and wind farm the size of Texas if they really wanted but they won't do it either...Starts with the land, goes over the usage rights and won't end with activists claiming how bad it all is.Means it won't happen and if it does then the energy providers get together and claim they guy might have money but does not have the right to provide energy unless he actuall starts a corresponding company and plays by their unwritten rules.Can we still dream about it though?The dream is kept alive like the fire of hope that is only a tiny amber.If you sign up for electricity you are asked if you would like to pay bit extra so your electricity comes from alternative sources.Why is that bad, after all it is green?The initial investment might be huge for a wind farm but after that it is more or less just providing mone out of thin air.You can look the cost up for the new windfarm build near you.Same for the electricity prices in that area.And also the expected output of the entire farm.Do the math and calculate how quickly they break even....Once they do it only profit but you still pay the extra to go green.A bit like the new road that came with a toll....After 5 years the motorists paid it off but 10 years later they are still being charged while the road is disintegrating...Now add electric cars and our constantly rising consumption to the mix...We can't provide the electricity ourselfs as we don't get fully paid for it, we can go off grid either.The atom as the source of electricity is being phased out slowly as well.Finally as some might say, considering the thausands of years we have to deal with the produced waste and what aftereffects the storage might bring.Our providers will keep their grip on us for as long as they can.No government will stop them as in return they wouldn't have electricity.A cold war if you like.We never cared how much fuel our cars use until the OPEC decide to limit supplies and drive the prices up.And you can see the riches especially in Saudi Arabia.For most of the big OPEC players it really does not matter anymore whether or not they have oil or not.They make the same or even more money by other means and more modern means now.After this initial shellshock we woke up and decided that for the shopping trip of the wife a small car with just 4 cylinders will do.Overcrowded cities and roads also pushed us more into thinking small.Again it took force to go further, this time by governments slowy "going green".Emmissions, greenhouse gasses, polution, particles and corbon monoxide...Sounded all godd in the ads but it meant we could no longer afford our old car or even got banned from entering the town center with it.But a lot people still can't afford a modern car that meets the standards.Once they finally got the money and car the laws change again and they need yet again a newer car.This created a huge export and recyling market and profits for other people though.And what differenc did it all make in reality?While we were forced to improve and lose money countries like the US refused for years to even consider reducing the pollution.Countries like China and Russia even increased their pollution to impossible levels.We all remember how Bejing was literally shut down for the Olympics so the athletes have a chance to survive the games...We know how the pollution or global warming problem is misused to make money.The governments get huge payouts in the form of taxes from those cars that can't meet the specs.The dealer smiles with the increased sales of cars.And again the government smiles too as they get taxes from this as well.We know it happened before and is still happening with everything realted to fossil fuels, global warming and pollution, so why would electricity be any different?Reactors and coal fired power plants are phased out with basically nothing to replace them.Solar and wind will provide and till then we keep what we really need to keep....There is no plan for what comes after coal and the atom.There is no alternative.Batteries need electricity.And providers will always be the middleman controlling both the price and the availability.So how does this actually work you might wonder...No matter who invents or produces a new device to provide electricity - there is a very limited market for them.A farmer can't buy a full size wind generator and place it on his land...But an electricity provider can buy thausands of them....And if you go bigger than ask yourself who would need a 10 or 100MW fusion generator?Providing electricity is only a viable option if you go big and if you can sell the excess with a profit margin.Leaves only our electricity providers as customers.If you don't have to care about the buying price because it will be put down one way or the other onto your customers than it is like a credit.Only difference is that once it is paid off you start to get money back!Imagine that for your bank account ;)And if you know what you sell can have a very generous profit margin because your buyer does not care then the solar or wind farm will be quite costly to build..."We know we are not cheap, but who else can deliver you what you need?"And like our big supermarkets there will be an agreement on what the wind generator can cost.Ressources....Be it wind, be it solar or just the modern electric motor in your car - they all require stuff that is very limited on our planet.Take Neodyminum.Without it we have no wind generator or fancy motors as we wouldn't have powerful enough magnets.Vital elements and mineral required are only available in a few spots on our erth in quantities justifying mining them.I won't make this much longer than it already is, so please look up what is really needed to keep our future solow and wind projects alive.Then go and check where we can find thes things in good quantities.Once you did you might realise why the world tolerates the abuse of human rights, freedom or just self expression in other countries ;)If only China would stop today to export and sell their rare earths and prcious minerals basically our entire production worldwide would suffer quickly.Entire industries break down quickly and prices for certain things would literally explode.The US already started to re-open long abandoned mining projects as suddenly even the most costly operations become viable again.Think about this next time you fancy a world free of cars and truck using combustion engines ;)

Topic by Downunder35m   |  last reply