Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
And now you're having problems with your caps lockBut then, you always have been, Frank.
And yet you still, for some reason, believe that you
have something worthwhile to say on the subject.
How do you reconcile these two?
Bob M.
Because I make a fist, and LOOK AT IT+.
wITHIN THE VOlume of that fist, I just KNOW that enough energy coulD BE
ElectronicaLly stored to run an EV+.
s/lie/liarI claim it isn't then.
WeLl, then - you are out on a much thinner LIMB THAN i AM+.
I think this song applies to you, EER lie:
Not smaLler - but with vastlY INCREASED MATCHING SURFACE AREA IN CONTACT WITH"FEerguy9" <feerguy9@cs.com> wrote in message
news:20040918044818.27462.00000234@mb-m01.news.cs.com...
I was just setting the stage for cap use+.+.+.+.+.read on, and I go to
LENGTHS
TO EXPlain how to keep the pLATE SMAlL+.
I've never seen you explain HOW to make the plates smaller.
What do you think capacitor manufacturers do all day? They are constantly
trying to make
capacitors smaller. If they can't do it you can't either.
yOUR cAPS lOCK sEEMS tO bE bROKEN, like your ideas are. Refer to articleNot smaLler - but with vastlY INCREASED MATCHING SURFACE AREA IN CONTACT WITH
OPPOSING Plate.+
Ouch! What a hideously malformed sentence. That should read "It wouldI'm sure that with capacitor plates manufactured to molecular
tolerances we could improve energy density compared to existing
capacitors. It would not still not beat fuel cells, internal
combustion or chemical batteries.
Well you wouldn't want the plates in contact or you have a short circuit.Not smaLler - but with vastlY INCREASED MATCHING SURFACE AREA IN CONTACT
WITH
OPPOSING Plate.+ By digging down to the moLECUlar LEVEl+.
A dieLECTRIC, NATURAllY+."FEerguy9" <feerguy9@cs.com> wrote in message
news:20040925152655.23677.00001404@mb-m06.news.cs.com...
Not smaLler - but with vastlY INCREASED MATCHING SURFACE AREA IN CONTACT
WITH
OPPOSING Plate.+ By digging down to the moLECUlar LEVEl+.
Well you wouldn't want the plates in contact or you have a short circuit.
What would you put between them?
I don't think there are any very good natural dielectrics? Which one did you"FEerguy9" <feerguy9@cs.com> wrote in message
news:20040925152655.23677.00001404@mb-m06.news.cs.com...
Not smaLler - but with vastlY INCREASED MATCHING SURFACE AREA IN
CONTACT
WITH
OPPOSING Plate.+ By digging down to the moLECUlar LEVEl+.
Well you wouldn't want the plates in contact or you have a short circuit.
What would you put between them?
A dieLECTRIC, NATURAllY+.
Except, of course, that this does nothing to increaseNot smaLler - but with vastlY INCREASED MATCHING SURFACE AREA IN CONTACT
WITH
OPPOSING Plate.+ By digging down to the moLECUlar LEVEl+.
The absurdity is in hanging on to an archiac form of energy.Electronic electricity repository is an utterly unworkable, crackpot energy
"concept" that apprently aims to entertain the readers of this group by
being posted over and over and over again, despite it having been completely
discredited ten ways to Christmas a long, long time ago. It has absolutely
no validity at all, and is about as likely to be used for "storing
electrical energy from any source" as, say, an elephant is of flying to the
Moon
on Cavorite wings. EER is supposedly intended to accommodate such
things as electric vehicles, home heating, etc., but since it's being
proposed
by someone who already admits that he knows nothing at all about this
field, we really, really do have to assume that it's being presented here
mostly as a weak attempt at humor. The funniest example of where
"EER" would utterly fail to work is the EV - Frank's crazy notion of an
electric car that would run on an "ever-accumulating" power source. That
is to say, this nutcase - but fortunately, no one else who possesses two
brain
cells to rub together, thinks that any and all sources of electrical
energy --
including "diffuse sources", whatever the hell THOSE are supposed to be
-- could be collected, combined and stored in the form of capacitance.
Never mind that Frank doesn't understand that energy isn't stored "in the
form of capacitance" in the first place, or even the first thing
about how capacitive storage actually works - this is HIS IDEA, by
Gawd, and it just seems SO damned attractive (to him) that it simply
MUST be right! But, wouldn't the capacitor plates be bigger than the
vehicle? Well, yes they would, but that's just the first in a long, long
line of both practical and theoretical objections
to this absurd idea. Of course, Frank has some idea - how this
idea was obtained is unclear, although we can't put recreational
pharmaceuticals out of consideration at this point - that a way to increase
the surface area of the plates *within a small perimeter* could be
fashioned. Never mind that this wouldn't have the slightest
impact on the energy density capabilities of the capacitor in question,
something that can easily be demonstrated by anyone who even barely
passed freshman geometry - again, this idea is one which Frank is
clearly in love with, and therefore it MUST be right. And apparently,
there simply isn't room within Frank's brain for troublesome trivia
like basic algebra, geometry, or physics. Some might suggest that
Scanning Tunneling Microscope Technology might be used to find
those locations within Frank's cerebrum where such things might still
reside, or we could possible even employ nanotechnology to accomplish
this (although this seems like a very cruel thing to do to a nanobot) -- but
clearly, to locate his understanding of these topics, we'll have to use SOME
methods that could identify items roughly halfway to the molecular level.
Doing this -- identifying such massive ignorance within a small perimeter
-- is the heart of any attempt to understand the source of "eer". Such
a project is undoubtedly needing a commitment of funds roughly equal
to that of the Human Genome Project, which admittedly is taken on faith
- and success could be many years away.
I mean, just consider the level of absurdity we're up against here. Frank
believes that "the object is to configure the plates and dielectric so they
all fit like Jell-O in a mold, and to make these all small in perimeter --
while yielding enormous surface area" - as if, again, that is somehow
going to increase the amount of energy one could store in a given
volume. We would also have to somehow understand how a statement
like "it is expected that about 15 sources of renewable energy
(solar, wind, wave, etc.) would be able to contribute to the 'eer pool'
of stored electrical energy" has anything at all
to do with the problems, no, the impossibilities, in what is being
discussed here. In time, though, an examination of how stupidity
and ignorance can be stored in this way could effectively replace
Saturday Night Live and Comedy Central combined as a source
of much of the nation's entertainment.
NOTE: EER absolutely, in no way, breaks the Second Law! It doesn't
have to, since there so many OTHER laws that it would have to break
to get even halfway toward being a viable concept.
If you're as tired of seeing this nonsense as some have claimed, you may
want to take it up with:
Frank Lincoln
FEerguy9@cs.com
eerguy9@aol.com
eerguy2000@yahoo.com
...but don't expect the rest of us to join you in this. We're having
too much fun laughing at this stuff!
By the way, In case you hadn't noticed, Frank is VERY weak
with computers. And physics. And math. And just about any
other subject you'd have to understand in order to actually make
a contribution in the field of energy generation and storage.
But, as he says, "this is no more than a guess from a novice"
and "there are some mistakes in here", showing that, if nothing
else, he is truly a master of extreme understatement.
In one sentence, he is saying that, despite all evidence and
arguments presented by those who actually DO understand
these subjects, that a very, very advanced capacitor is possible,
regardless of what those stupid ol' physics texts would have
you believe.
But it's by no means an energy concept.
And no, there is no 21st Law of Thermodynamics. Once again,
we already have more than sufficient laws to show what
nonsense this whole EER thing is.
But there IS a 21st Century Law of Crackpot Behavior.
Simply stated, it is, "No energy concept involving capacitance
shall ever be considered as unworthy of posting over and over
and over again, no matter how silly it is or how many times it
has been utterly discredited."
Freud could not have seen this coming, but then in his day, there
was not the multitude of diffuse (and obtuse) forms of crackpot
thinking that we are forced to contend with today.
There is NO way around this Law. By that, I mean that there is
apparently nothing we can do but continue to be subjected to
Frank's endless postings, and take whatever meager enjoyment
we can from them. There is simply no way to begin solving the
"diffuse" (at best!) nature of his understanding of the subjects
at hand before we would be able to put the energy behind his
constant posting to work in any effective way. Say, basket weaving
or bowling-ball polishing.
Just remeber that, in Frank's little world, and no matter what any
of us say, this will remain "A goal......an idea......a prediction......."
Crackpotism is easy, and there is no shortage of such here.
After all, we ARE talking about someone who seriously believes
that, thanks SOLELY to his Marvelous Invention,
"We don't need oil.
We don't need batteries.
We don't need internal combustion engines.
We don't need fusion.
We don't need hybrids.
We don't need hydrogen-powered cars.
We don't need ethanol.
We don't need natural gas.
We don't need methane.
We don't even need efficiency.
We don't even need conservation."
I ask you - could one even hope for better evidence of the
absurdity of this whole idea than THAT?
yOU MISS THE POINT Big time!Tim Auton <tim.auton@uton.groupSexWithoutTheY> wrote:
[EER]
I'm sure that with capacitor plates manufactured to molecular
tolerances we could improve energy density compared to existing
capacitors. It would not still not beat fuel cells, internal
combustion or chemical batteries.
Ouch! What a hideously malformed sentence. That should read "It would
still not beat fuel cells, internal combustion or chemical
batteries.".
fAITH+."FEerguy9" <feerguy9@cs.com> wrote in message
news:20040925152655.23677.00001404@mb-m06.news.cs.com...
Not smaLler - but with vastlY INCREASED MATCHING SURFACE AREA IN CONTACT
WITH
OPPOSING Plate.+ By digging down to the moLECUlar LEVEl+.
Well you wouldn't want the plates in contact or you have a short circuit.
What would you put between them?
"FEerguy9" <feerguy9@cs.com> wrote in message
news:20040926075907.11054.00001026@mb-m14.news.cs.com...
"FEerguy9" <feerguy9@cs.com> wrote in message
news:20040925152655.23677.00001404@mb-m06.news.cs.com...
Not smaLler - but with vastlY INCREASED MATCHING SURFACE AREA IN
CONTACT
WITH
OPPOSING Plate.+ By digging down to the moLECUlar LEVEl+.
Well you wouldn't want the plates in contact or you have a short circuit.
What would you put between them?
A dieLECTRIC, NATURAllY+.
I don't think there are any very good natural dielectrics? Which one did you
have in mind? If the plates are only a few molecules apart it must be a
very good dielectric or the breakdown voltage will be unacceptably low.
"FEerguy9" <feerguy9@cs.com> wrote in message
news:20040925152655.23677.00001404@mb-m06.news.cs.com...
Not smaLler - but with vastlY INCREASED MATCHING SURFACE AREA IN CONTACT
WITH
OPPOSING Plate.+ By digging down to the moLECUlar LEVEl+.
Except, of course, that this does nothing to increase
the energy density available in a given volume, for some
very basic reasons of geometry that you apparently
keep failing to grasp.
bECAUSE i AM BASICAllY RIGHT+. eER WIlL HAPPEN!!"FEerguy9" <feerguy9@cs.com> wrote in message
news:20040920073642.16600.00000800@mb-m16.news.cs.com...
Yes -- I am getting totaLly LOST IN THIS+.
But then, you always have been, Frank.
And yet you still, for some reason, believe that you
have something worthwhile to say on the subject.
How do you reconcile these two?
oKAY - THEN WORK OUT A BETTER WAY+.FEerguy9 wrote:
"FEerguy9" <feerguy9@cs.com> wrote in message
news:20040920073642.16600.00000800@mb-m16.news.cs.com...
Yes -- I am getting totaLly LOST IN THIS+.
But then, you always have been, Frank.
And yet you still, for some reason, believe that you
have something worthwhile to say on the subject.
How do you reconcile these two?
Bob M.
Because I make a fist, and LOOK AT IT+.
wITHIN THE VOlume of that fist, I just KNOW that enough energy coulD BE
ElectronicaLly stored to run an EV+.
Frank
-------------
Sure, but not the way you say, the physics is against it.
i SAW ON tv YESTERDAY WHAT nUKES CAN DO TO CHIldrenNukes that size can destroy cities, but that's not the modality
you suggest.
Electrostatics has much lower spatial theoretic limits.
Chemical can do it, and the forces generated by chemistry are
a kind of electrostatic, but the kind of electrostatic you suggest
cannot.
If you simply went back to school and mastered the physics,
For a good cause, IMHO+.immediately understand why and slap your forehead for making such
a ridiculous ass of yourself.
yEA - A littLE GIFT FROM SOME OIL guy, I suppose+."FEerguy9" <feerguy9@cs.com> wrote in message
news:20040923232438.13148.00001398@mb-m28.news.cs.com...
But then, you always have been, Frank.
And yet you still, for some reason, believe that you
have something worthwhile to say on the subject.
How do you reconcile these two?
Bob M.
Because I make a fist, and LOOK AT IT+.
wITHIN THE VOlume of that fist, I just KNOW that enough energy coulD BE
ElectronicaLly stored to run an EV+.
And now you're having problems with your caps lock
I know that we don't need no stinkin' oiL!key in addition to this delusion that you "know"
something.
Assuming that you meant an "archiac" form of energyI ask you - could one even hope for better evidence of the
absurdity of this whole idea than THAT?
The absurdity is in hanging on to an archiac form of energy.
And those are just the first things on what is apparentlyExcept, of course, that this does nothing to increase
the energy density available in a given volume, for some
very basic reasons of geometry that you apparently
keep failing to grasp.
Okay - I admit that you are correct there+.
Area of pLATES AND VOLume of dielECTRIC CONFUSE ME+.
In short, no. The more complete answerbut, WOUld not the vastLY INCREASED AREA OF MATCHING SURFACE AREAS BE A
FACTOR
IN THE VOlume? Just asking+.
Ah, so now you're right simply by declaring yourselfHow do you reconcile these two?
bECAUSE i AM BASICAllY RIGHT+. eER WIlL HAPPEN!!