|
Dear
Subscriber,
Our story #1 is so
spectacular that it is being submitted
to New Scientist magazine in the
hopes that it is sufficiently newsworthy to their
readership as well. We had two breakthroughs
presented at SPESIF 2012 which also directly
relate to available IRI publications. The first
was the presentation by Dr. Moddel
proving zero-point energy
emission from gases in Casimir cavities.
(See related story #4 showing light emission from
zero-point energy dynamic Casimir cavities
from New Scientist). The second was
the breakthrough announcement from Mike Gamble
that Boeing has been using inertial
propulsion for moving satellites for
years, which confirms our long-term IRI advocacy
(with multiple inertial propulsion reports) when
no other school or institution in the country
recognized its value!
It is a direct impact on
the energy costs for space to have private
industry find a less expensive fee for access to
space low earth orbit (LEO). That is story #2
on SpaceX courtesy of Dr. Paul
Werbos from NSF, who also graciously gave SPESIF
2012 a wonderful remote presentation through
webcast (see www.futurenergy.org for
online video).
IRI could not have
written a better story #3 than to report a
discovery of something exceeding 100%
efficiency in energy. Thanks to a
heads-up from one of our readers, this summary of
a Physical Review Letters journal
article is the real thing we hope for to signal a
new energy source emergence. Though apologies are
given in the article for the low level of light
that seems to be related to the anomaly, still the
nature of the energy source that provides the
boost needs to be considered for such a 2X energy
output vs. input. Of course, based on our
concurrent stories (#1 and #4), it is likely that
there is a quantum vacuum
explanation.
With story #5
presenting the latest ARPA-E call for
transformational energy technologies, it may be a
good place for cavitation
fusion or sonofusion inventors to seek
funding. IRI attempted to arrange a second
cavitation fusion presentation for next month but
was cancelled by the scheduled presenter after all
the arrangements were made. We hope our IRI
members who responded are not too inconvenienced
by the change of plans. Instead, you can see a
short interview with our first cavitation fusion
interview with one of the world's experts from
SPESIF 2011, Dr. Max Formichev-Zamilov from Penn
State University on the new IRI release DVD,
"Breakthrough Developments
in Energy and Propulsion" (see ad at
bottom of FE eNews), along with four other amazing
scientist interviews from the same SPESIF
conference, thanks to reporter Matt
Baird.
Thomas Valone,
PhD,PE
Editor
www.IntegrityResearchInstitute.org
| |
| |
1)
Breakthrough
Energy Technologies Presented at SPESIF
2012 |
Integrity Research
Institute, Press Release, March 26, 2012, www.futurenergy.org
The
recent Space,
Propulsion & Energy Sciences International
Forum
(SPESIF) held at the University of Maryland's
Riggs Alumni Center on February 29 - March 2, 2012
had amazing breakthrough technologies
presented.
The
opening night featured two presentations on low
energy nuclear reactions (LENR),
including Dr. David Nagel from George Washington
University on the science and business of LENR.
The follow-up presentation remotely by Sterling
Allan from New Energy Congress was proof that a
breakthrough has occurred in this hotly contested
field. Referring to his recent trip to Greece,
Sterling reported on the Defkalion
company's progress in producing a sustained heat
output in the kilowatt range with a proprietary
catalyst. The webcasted presentations are also
online at www.futurenergy.org
in an Adobe Connect format which launches
automatically. There was some trouble with the
March 1st
presentations since a Mac was used for the first
few of them but most of them over the three days
include the PowerPoint slideshow and concurrent
audio and video.
The
best presentations of a true breakthrough the next
day consisted of Dr. Garret Moddel from the
University of Colorado and also Mike Gamble from
Boeing. Garret discussed his experimental
investigation into the zero-point
energy emission from
noble gases flowing through Casimir cavities,
which is a test of his patent #7,379,286,
coinvented with Dr. Bernard Haisch from Calphysics
Institute. To their surprise, Helium had a more
robust output of radiation in the microwatt range
than the heavier Xenon, measured with a pyrometer.
Their unusual theory of constricting a gas atom
quantum mechanically and then looking for a
release of energy actually worked, showing that
zero-point energy can be utilized to produce
energy!
Of course the reabsorption of the lost energy from
the quantum vacuum completes the engine cycle
according to the patent disclosure, which also
resembles the Josef Papp engine (patent
#4,428,193) in many ways. Our institute expects a
resurgence in the orders for the next edition of
our book, Zero Point Energy: the Fuel of the
Future, as a result of Dr. Moddel's
experimental confirmation of a zero-point energy
emission from a Casimir cavity.
|
Boeing's Inertial Propulsion device
used for years on their
Satellites. |
Mike
Gamble's presentation was more tangible with an
analysis of the Dean Drive style of inertial
(mechanical) propulsion converted to
electromagnetic equivalence. However, the
breakthrough announcement came at the end as to
the reason for his investigation: Boeing has been
using a "scissoring gyroscope" style of inertial
propulsion for satellite maneuvering for years!
This confirmation of a controversial method of
force production is a first for any major
corporation. (IRI recommends our "Inertial Propulsion Patent
Collection" and other related reports for
those unacquainted with this simple but effective
way to produce a unidirectional force.) Mike also
mentioned that it was so old by now that Boeing
didn't mind if he mentioned it to the public. He
even let me photograph his pictures of the
company's test model, which is quite large.
It is now clear from Gamble's presentation
that the physics and mechanical engineering
textbooks need to be rewritten to include this
amazing breakthrough, which has quietly ushered in
an alternate method for force production, even in
space, that can be solar-powered and electrically
driven.
Several of the
presentations included local talent as
well: University of
Maryland researchers
Prof. Cui, Chiang, and Prof. Pomerantseva, a
National Science Foundation senior scientist. Dr.
Paul Werbos, a former FDA research scientist, Judy
Kosovich, a US DOE senior scientist Dave
Goodwin, who was also the recipient of the "2012
Integrity In Research Award" for his unique
contributions to emerging energy science. The
keynote address was by Dr. George Miley who has
just completed his amazing autobiography which
will be published by IRI in the fall.
Outstanding presentations were also done by
Osamu Ide, Don Reed, Charles Lundquist,
Anthony Fresco, James Putnam, Clive Woods,
Philip Bouchard, Hamilton
Carter, and Robert DeBiase. All these
presentations were recorded and webcasted
and are available at futurenergy.org free of charge to
all.
We
want to again thank our sponsors for generously
supporting our conference: Arcos Cielos Research
Center, Global Gateway Foundation, Ivan Kruglak
and Marc Plotkin. We also want to thank all
our volunteers: Elaine Chen,
Craig Fatzinger, Gerard VandenBerg and
Hamilton Smith! Your help is invaluable to
us. And last but not least, Thanks to all
who attended and made this year SPESIF a great
success!
back to table of
contents |
2) American Innovation: Race to
Space |
From: global-energy-
On Behalf
Of Paul Werbos Sent: Wednesday,
March 21, 2012 9:21 AM To: Global
Energy Network
I highly
recommend watching this relatively short 60
Minutes segment in full:
SpaceX: Entrepreneur's
race to space
The Administration
deserves a lot of credit for a policy that is
sparking this type of private sector
innovation.
|
IRI President at
SPACEX exhibit on the National
Mall. |
I have many friends who
believe that SpaceX will reduce the cost of
access to space down to the $400/kg-LEO point
where it seems likely that we can get energy from
space at about the same generating cost per kwh as
we can get form wind and solar, if we do the best
we can with all three. This is very important,
since the electric power market
(worth about $2 trillion per year, if we assume 10
cents per kwh) is made up of many market segments,
some of which are best served by the steady
24-hour power we can get from space, some of which
are best served by the reliable day-time power we
can get from solar farms sited in areas of
reliable sun.
Elon Musk, the guy behind
SpaceX, is also behind Tesla, which has an
interesting plan for an all-electric SUV at a
price some might find interesting ($60,000 but
saving about $2000 per year on fuel in the US
compares not so badly with some other SUVs), and
which mastered engines using zero rare earths
before all its main competitors. So I hope they
are right, but....
I agree strongly with the
Administration policy to encourage COTS. The
primary credit (but certainly not all the credit)
should go to Lori Garver at NASA, and to the
relationship between Lori and Obama (the details
of which I certainly do not know about). Lori was
once Executive Director of the National Space
Society, and I had a little bit of contact (all
pleasant) with her in those old days. NSS was one
of the groups which played an important role in
advancing COTS, but there are other groups like
the Space Frontier Foundation which I think are
far more focused advocates specifically for that
issue.
As I happen to be on the
governing board of NSS this year, having known
some of the key people for many decades, I have
looked into this issue in great detail. (By the
way, when I worked in Specter's office, I took the
initiative to get a SpaceX briefing in the
Senator's main conference room.)
BUT...
there are really intense
debates at times between the "new space COTS"
movement" and the big stakeholder
Boeing/ Lockheed/etc
group. Even within NSS. In my view, it is a
microcosm of US politics in general. One group in
power represents a positive psychology, a big step
upwards from the past... but just not quite good
enough for us to survive at all, unless certain
changes are made. (By the way, I mean "survival"
literally here.) But the other group has
often let itself be overwhelmed by negative and
reactionary psychology, to the point where it can
be even worse.
Having studied a bit of
technical psychology (see my current paper in
Neural Networks, a follow-on to my 2009 paper on
the brain which won me the Hebb Award), I tend to
think of this as kind of bipolar disorder, with
one group suffering from too much traumatic
negativity and another equally aberrated by
euphoria and group spirit. But this year... I see
some signs of some hope of mental recovery, as the
new talking points of the Space Exploration
Alliance (the big umbrealla group) seem more
balanced and realistic than they were last year.
But... it may or may not be good
enough.
The fact is -- for all his
positive spirit and enthusiasm and innovation...
enthusiasm alone cannot keep a reusable rocket
from melting as it comes back through the
atmosphere.
SpaceX can beat today's
Russian competition on price and quality when it
comes to getting astronauts
to the International Space
Station with expendable rockets. But to get to
$400/kg-LEO, Musk knows one needs reusability. But
right now, it looks a lot more likely that the
Russians will get there than that we will.. ever.
The problem is that we are at risk of losing
crucial technology needed to get there, which is
partly a matter of materials technology and partly
a matter of hypersonics systems design technology.
The issue of retirements in the aerospace
industry (and of other critical engineering
sectors) is far more serious than most people
understand.
So if we have lots of
enthusiasm but can't actually build anything... we
end up dead.
I have learned a lot about
the current status of all this. I recently found
out that while NASA
was throwing away so much
money on heavy lift vehicle development designed
to NOT use or
upgrade the key structural
technologies, and while the AF X37B activity got
hijacked by stakeholder politics,
DARPA quietly planned a
kind of $300 million 10,000 pound global reach
vehicle which would have
really plugged the hole,
stopped the bleeding and put us even ahead of the
past. (Except for maybe a few systems aspects that
would be far less expensive, probably easy to fit
in if people wanted to.) But... I
guess
it was the outgoing
director of DARPA... it sounded so threatening to
some people, so was quietly
shifted to 100
pounds.
Nice and quiet, just like
how we lost our most advanced missile
interception technology just over the past few
months.
Best of
Luck,
Paul.
back to
table of contents
|
3)
LED's Exceed 100%
Efficiency |
March 5, 2012 by
Lisa Zyga,
PhysOrg.com
http://www.physorg.com/news/2012-03-efficiency.html
An LED's power
conversion (wall-plug) efficiency varies inversely
with its optical output power. Wall-plug
efficiency can exceed 100%, the unity efficiency,
at low applied voltages and high temperatures.
Image credit: Santhanam, et al. ©2012 American
Physical Society.
(PhysOrg.com) --
For the first time, researchers have demonstrated
that an LED can emit more optical power than the
electrical power it consumes. Although
scientifically intriguing, the results won't
immediately result in ultra-efficient commercial
LEDs since the demonstration works only for LEDs
with very low input power that produce very small
amounts of light.The efficiency is around 230%
according to calculations - Ed.
Note
The researchers, Parthiban
Santhanam and coauthors from MIT, have published
their study in a recent issue of Physical
Review Letters.
As the researchers explain
in their study, the key to achieving a power conversionefficiency above
100%, i.e., "unity efficiency," is to greatly
decrease the applied voltage. According to their
calculations, as the voltage is halved, the input
power is decreased by a factor of 4, while the
emitted light power scales linearly with voltage
so that it's also only halved. In other words, an
LED's efficiency increases as its output power
decreases. (The inverse of this relationship -
that LED efficiency decreases as its output power
increases - is one of the bigest hurdles in
designing bright, efficient LED
lights.)
In their experiments, the
researchers reduced the LED's input power to just
30 picowatts and measured an output of 69
picowatts of light - an efficiency of 230%. The
physical mechanisms worked the same as with any
LED: when excited by the applied voltage,
electrons and holes have a certain probability of
generating photons. The researchers didn't try to
increase this probability, as some previous
research has focused on, but instead took
advantage of small amounts of excess heat to emit
more power than consumed. This heat arises from
vibrations in the device's atomic lattice, which
occur due to entropy.
This light-emitting
process cools the LED slightly,
making it operate similar to a thermoelectric
cooler. Although the cooling is insufficient to
provide practical cooling at room temperature, it
could potentially be used for designing lights
that don't generate heat. When used as a heat
pump, the device might be useful for solid-state
cooling applications or even power
generation.
Theoretically, this
low-voltage strategy allows for an arbitrarily
efficient generation of photons at low voltages.
For this reason, the researchers hope that the
technique could offer a new way to test the limits
of energy-efficiency electromagnetic
communication.
More
information: Parthiban Santhanam, et al.
"Thermoelectrically Pumped Light-Emitting Diodes
Operating above Unity Efficiency." Phys.
Rev. Lett. 108, 09740 (2012). DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.097403
Physics Synopsis
|
4) Harnessing the
Quantum Power of Empty
Space |
by
David Harris, New
Scientist, February 20, 2012
http://www.newscientist.com/artic
See
introductory "What is Empty Space?" (3
minute video) http://bcove.me/d3c6fmrh
The
elusive Casimir effect suggests we could use
vacuum energy to move objects and make stuff - but
can something really come from
nothing?
NOTHING
will come of nothing." Shakespeare's
epithet seems
the kind of self-evident statement that only poets
and philosophers would argue over. And physicists
like Chris Wilson.
Last
year, Wilson and his team at the Chalmers
University of Technology
in Gothenburg,Sweden, provided what seems a
particularly egregious case of something for
nothing. They claimed to have conjured up light
from nowhere simply by squeezing down empty space
(New Scientist, 19
November 2011, p 16).
That would be the latest manifestation of a
quantum quirk known as the Casimir effect: the
notion that a perfect vacuum, the very definition
of nothingness in the physical world, contains a
latent power that can be harnessed to move objects
and make stuff.
Sightings of this
vacuum action have been mounting over the past
decade or so, leading some physicists to propose a
new generation of nanoscale machines to take
advantage of it, and others even to suggest a
leading role for vacuum energy in determining the
origin and fate of the cosmos. Others remain to be
convinced. So what's the true story?
The idea that a
vacuum is a seething sea of something can be
traced back to the early decades of quantum
physics. In the late 1920s, the German physicist
Werner Heisenberg came up with his famous uncertainty
principle, which says that some pairs of
measurable quantities are intimately connected:
the more you know about the one, the less you know
about the other.
Energy and time
are one such pair. That means you cannot measure
the energy of a physical system with perfect
precision unless time itself is completely
imprecisely defined - that is, you take infinite
time to perform your measurement. It follows that
the zero-energy nothingness of the vacuum can
never be pinned down precisely. According to
quantum theory, even a perfect vacuum is filled
with wave-like fields that fluctuate constantly,
producing a legion of ephemeral particles that
continually pop up out of nowhere only to
disappear again, filling the vacuum with a
distinct, non-zero "zero-point
energy".
This recasting of the vacuum gave fresh
impetus to the centuries-old debate about the
nature of nothingness
(New Scientist, 19
November 2011, p 50). But evidence also began
to accumulate that the newly lively vacuum had
practical effects. Observe atoms carefully enough
and you see a tiny effect known as the Lamb shift,
in which vacuum fluctuations jostle an orbiting
electron, subtly altering its energy. Something
similar can be invoked to explain how electrons
sometimes spontaneously jump between two atomic
energy states, giving off photons of
light.
But Hendrik
Casimir's suggestion was the most eye-catching. In
1948, together with his colleague Dirk Polder, the
Dutch physicist was trying to understand how
colloids exist in a stable equilibrium. Colloids
are mixtures in which one type of substance is
dispersed through another, like fat globules in
the watery solution of milk. Forces between the
molecules in such a medium drop off more quickly
with distance than basic calculations using the
classical electromagnetic van der Waals force
allow. It is as if something is pulling the
constituent molecules closer together, giving the
mixture extra stability.
Following a
tip-off from the Danish quantum doyen Niels Bohr,
Casimir calculated that this something could be
vacuum action. Working out the effects of vacuum
fluctuations in a colloid's complex molecular brew
was impossibly involved. So Casimir considered a
simple model system of two parallel metallic
plates, and showed that the fluctuations could
produce just the right enhanced attraction between
them. His explanation was that the two plates
limit the wavelength of vacuum fluctuations in the
space between. Outside those confines, the
fluctuations can have any wavelength they choose.
With more waves outside than in, a pressure pushes
inward on the plates (see
diagram).
The effect is
tiny: two plates 10 nanometres apart feel a force
comparable to the gentle burden of the atmosphere
on our heads. Such a minuscule contribution is
easily washed out by a legion of other effects,
such as residual electrostatic attractions between
charges on the plates' surfaces. That makes
confirming its existence extremely tough. "You
need to know that you're really measuring the
Casimir force," says experimentalist Hong
Tang of YaleUniversity. What's more,
it is not easy to align plates to be perfectly
parallel, while calculating the expected effect
for other, more complex geometries takes some
sophisticated mathematics.
It was only in 1996
that Steven Lamoreaux, a physicist then at
the University of Washingtonin Seattle,
made a breakthrough. Taking elaborate precautions
to exclude all other effects, he found a tiny
residual force pulling a metal plate and a
spherical lens together (Physical Review
Letters, vol 78, p 5). The Casimir effect, it
seemed, was not a theorist's pipe dream: vacuum
action was a real effect.
Since then, a
steady trickle of results has confirmed other
long-standing theoretical predictions. Soviet
physicist Evgeny Lifshitz proposed in 1955 that
the size of vacuum fluctuations would grow with
rising temperature, resulting in a force that is
more potent over longer distances. In February
2011, Lamoreaux, now at Yale University,
and his team confirmed that this is indeed the
case (Nature Physics,
vol 7, p 230)
Nanoscale kick
As for the work
of Wilson's team, their results, published
last November, support a four-decade-old
prediction that turns the logic of the original
Casimir effect on its head. Rather than using the
vacuum's pop-up particles to shift their
surroundings, if you move a vacuum's surroundings
fast enough, you can make real photons of light.
In some quarters, this idea is controversial - but
it is the most dramatic putative demonstration of
the vacuum's powers to date (see "Light from speeding
mirrors")
As sightings of
such effects have multiplied, so have thoughts
that we might harness them for our own devices. A
popular proposal is to use the vacuum's energy to
give nanoscale machines an additional kick. That
requires something a little different from the
original Casimir force, whose attractive effects
are more likely to gum up the components of any
mini-machine - a phenomenon referred to
as static friction or "stiction"
By tweaking the
geometries or material properties of the
structures used to confine the vacuum, however, it
should be possible to reverse the direction of the
Casimir effect, creating an outward pressure to
push two objects apart. In 2008, Steven Johnson and his colleagues
at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
calculated that by adding a series of interleaving
metal brackets, zipper-style, to the faces of the
two metal plates you could in theory make the net
force between them repulsive. A more recent study
by Stanislav Maslovski and Mário Silveirinha of
the University of Coimbra, Portugal, has indicated
a similar effect using nanoscale metallic rods to
create areas of repulsive force that can levitate
a nanoscale metal bar (Physical Review A,
vol 83, p 022508).
These forces
could help nanoscale components such as switches,
gears, bearings or motor parts to operate without
jamming. Putting such devices into practice might
not be easy, though. For a start, it would require
components with atomic-scale polishing: look on a
small enough scale - a thousand atoms or so - and
metal surfaces usually thought of as smooth have
patchy, crystal-like structures that would confine
vacuum fluctuations in different ways, affecting
the size of the Casimir force. For moving objects,
things become even trickier.
Such
complications are surmountable: in 2009 Federico Capasso and
group at Harvard
University measured what appeared to be
repulsive Casimir forces in a gold cantilever
suspended in bromobenzene liquid above a silicon
surface (Nature, vol 457, p
170). The forces generated were mere tens of
piconewtons - but when you are trying to move
nanoscale particles, a piconewton goes a long way.
Nevertheless, there are still hurdles to be
overcome before Casimir devices are everyday
reality, says Johnson. "It is an experimental
question - can we make devices this small and
sensitive?" he says. "And it is also a theoretical
question of whether we can design interesting uses
for the Casimir force once the experimental
capabilities arrive. There is a more
fundamental objection, however. The litany of
theoretical predictions gradually being turned
into experimental reality invites a simple
conclusion: vacuum fluctuations are real, and they
are what is responsible for what we call Casimir
effects. But not all physicists buy
that.
Their unease lies
in calculations done by Casimir and Polder even
before they settled on vacuum fluctuations as the
explanation for the weakened van der Waals force.
These showed that much the same weakening could be
achieved simply by taking into account the finite
time the force takes to be transmitted over large
enough distances, such as between two plates
separated by tens or hundreds of nanometres. That
idea was revived and bolstered by calculations in
the 1970s by the Nobel-prizewinning physicist
Julian Schwinger. He never believed in the reality
of vacuum fluctuations and developed a version of
quantum field theory, which he called source
theory, to do away with them. In this picture, the
Casimir effect pops out just by taking into
account the quantum interaction of charged matter,
with no vacuum action at all
Robert Jaffe, a
particle theorist at the Massachusetts Institute
of Technology, suggests the only reason the vacuum
interpretation has gained such currency is because
its mathematics happens to be a lot simpler. "There
is a flippant way people refer to the Casimir
effect as evidence for real vacuum fluctuations,"
he says. "But there is no evidence that the vacuum
fluctuations exist in the absence of matter".
Similarly, other effects invoked as proof of their
reality - the Lamb shift and the spontaneous
emission of photons from atoms - can be described
purely as the result of charge
interactions
If this is so, it
could have repercussions for more than our
attempts to fine-tune the workings of
nanomachines. The realisation in the past couple
of decades that the universe's expansion is
accelerating - a phenomenon ascribed to a
mysterious "dark energy" - has
fuelled a new interest in the power of the vacuum.
At the moment, our best calculations of the
vacuum's hidden energy come up with a figure some
120 orders of magnitude larger than the amount
needed to bring about the cosmic acceleration, a
mismatch that counts perhaps as the worst-ever
prediction in physics. Yet observations of the
Casimir effect are still eagerly seen as evidence
for a power that might determine our cosmic
fate.
Schwinger's
original calculations were part of a wider
attempt, ultimately unsuccessful, to banish vacuum
fluctuations from quantum field theory. The truth
may well lie uncomfortably in the middle: we might
never be able to convince ourselves of the reality
of vacuum energy, because any attempt to do so
brings some form of matter into the equation.
As philosophers of science
Svend Rugh and Henrik Zinkernagel wrote in
2001, "It seems impossible to decide whether
the effects result from the vacuum 'in itself'...
or are generated by the introduction of the
measurement arrangement."
Wilson hopes that
the photons emerging from his apparatus
in Sweden, if confirmed by other groups, will
provide the final illumination to prove the
reality of vacuum fluctuations. Equally, as our
ability to construct filigree nanomachines and so
test the Casimir effect increases over the coming
years, perhaps some deviation from the predictions
will give us a definitive handle on where the
effects come from. Can nothing truly come of
nothing? We might still have cause to speak
again.
Light from speeding
MIRRORS
In 1970, American
physicist Gerald Moore proposed reversing the
logic of the Casimir effect. He envisaged rapidly
accelerating mirrors that would squeeze the vacuum
fluctuations in the space between them so
violently that they would give up some of their
energy in the form of photons (Journal of
Mathematical Physics, vol 11, p 2679).
In practice it is
not possible to accelerate even a small
macroscopic mirror fast enough to produce this
"dynamical" Casimir effect, so last year Chris
Wilson and his team from the Chalmers University
of Technology in Gothenburg, Sweden, used rapidly
varying electrical currents to simulate the effect
of mirrors accelerating to something like a
quarter of the speed of light. The result was the
simultaneous production of pairs of photons from
the vacuum, exactly as Moore had
predicted (Nature, vol 479, p
376)
Wilson thinks
there could be some exciting applications. During
the era of inflation thought to have taken place
right after the big bang, the boundary of the
universe itself would have expanded at near the
speed of light, leading to the creation of photons
through the dynamical Casimir effect. "It is
rather difficult to create your own big bang in
the lab," says Wilson. "Our set-up or a
similar one might be used to simulate these
effects, essentially doing table-top
cosmology.
Just as the
original Casimir effect is disputed, however (see
main story), not everyone is convinced that this
interpretation of the experiment is right. One
physicist, who preferred not to be named, says
that as nothing in the experiment actually moves,
it does not demonstrate the dynamical Casimir
effect at all. Instead, it is just another "solid
and interesting" example of a well-known effect in
which some of a quantum circuit's electrical
energy is emitted as light. The mathematical
description of the two effects is very similar, he
says, but "one should never mistake mathematics
for reality".
Since the
preliminary version of their paper was
circulated, Wilson's team has carried out
additional tests that Wilson thinks
defuse such criticisms, although he acknowledges
there are still dissenting voices.
"We did a number
of sanity checks ruling out various spurious
effects that could have masqueraded as the effect,
including showing that we were starting from the
vacuum state," he says. "But for some people, the
dynamical Casimir effect will never be anything
but a literal moving mirror."
David
Harris is a
writer based in Palo Alto,
California
|
5) ARPA-E Issues Open
Call for Transformational
Technologies |
US
DOE Energy.gov Press Release, March 2, 2012 -
2:31pm http://energy.gov/articles/arpa-e-issues-open-call-transformational-energy-technologies
DOE's
Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy
(ARPA-E) issued a $150 million funding
opportunity on March 2 that is open to all
transformational energy technologies. This Open
Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) is a call
to scientists, engineers, and entrepreneurs to
propose early-stage research projects that would
not otherwise be able to attract private
investment. Such projects could lead to
breakthrough energy technologies. This is the
second Open FOA released under ARPA-E.
The
open call includes electricity generation by
renewable means; electricity transmission,
storage, and distribution; energy efficiency for
buildings, manufacturing and commerce, and
personal use; and all aspects of transportation,
including the production and distribution of
renewable fuels, electrification, and energy
efficiency in transportation. Individual awards
under the Open FOA will range between $250,000 and
$10 million. See the DOE press
release (below) and the FOA
announcement online.
Washington,
D.C. - Today, the Advanced Research
Projects Agency - Energy (ARPA-E) issued a $150 million funding
opportunity open to all transformational energy
technologies to support the Obama Administration's
all-of-the-above approach to solving our nation's
most pressing energy challenges. This Open Funding
Opportunity Announcement is a call to our
country's brightest scientists, engineers and
entrepreneurs to propose early-stage research
projects that would not otherwise be able to
attract private investment, but could lead to
breakthrough energy technologies. This is the
second open funding opportunity released under
ARPA-E. The first was in
2009.
"Today
we are calling on our nation's best and brightest
to catalyze energy breakthroughs in all areas
imaginable through this Open Funding Opportunity
Announcement, which illustrates the true purpose
of ARPA-E," said Director
Majumdar.
"Innovation is our nation's sweet spot, and it is
critically important that we look at every
possible energy solution in order to ensure
America's future prosperity and
security."
This
Open Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) joins
ARPA-E's other recently issued FOA -
Methane Opportunities for Vehicular Energy (MOVE)
- which will make $30 million available to find
ways to harness our abundant supplies of domestic
natural gas for vehicles and was announced by
President Obama last week at the University of
Miami.
More
details on all of ARPA-E's Funding Opportunities and
Requests For Information are available HERE.
Individual awards under the Open FOA will range
between $250,000 and $10 million.
President
Obama launched the Energy Department's Advanced
Research Projects Agency - Energy (ARPA-E) in 2009 to seek out
transformational, breakthrough technologies that
are too risky for private sector investment but
have the potential to translate science into
quantum leaps in energy technology, form the
foundation for entirely new industries, and in the
future have large commercial impact.
Including
its most recent round of selections, ARPA-E has funded a total of more
than 180 projects, for $521.7 million in awards
across 12 program areas. Demonstrating the success
ARPA-E has already seen, the
Agency announced last year that eleven of its
projects that received $40 million from ARPA-E for innovative research,
were able to use this funding to demonstrate
results, which allowed these teams to secure more
than $200 million in outside private capital
investment.
ARPA-E's third annual Energy Innovation
Summit featured 107 speakers, including: President
Bill Clinton; Microsoft Founder and Chairman, Bill
Gates; Xerox CEO, Ursula Burns; FedEx CEO, Fred
Smith; BDT Capital Chairman, Lee Scott; Deputy
Secretary of Defense, Ashton Carter; MIT
President, Susan Hockfield; U.S. Energy Secretary,
Steven Chu; and ARPA-E Director, Arun
Majumdar. The Summit attracted 2,440
attendees from 49 states and 26 countries and
featured a Technology Showcase displaying over 240
breakthrough energy developments from ARPA-E's awardees, finalists and other
teams. News Media Contact:
202-586-4940
|
About Integrity
Research Institute
Future
Energy eNews is
provided as a public service from Integrity Research
Institute, a
Non-Profit dedicated to educating the public
on eco-friendly emerging energy technologies.
FREE copy
of the 30 minute DVD "Progress in Future Energy"
is available by sending an email with "Free DVD" in subject
and mailing address in
body.
Your
generous support is welcome by making a tax
deductible donation on our
secure website | | | |
- Scott Kelsey,
Missouri State, explaining Rejuvamatrix,
Pulsed EMF therapy to increase the length of DNA
telomeres, which directly affect our lifespan.
- Max
Formitchev-Zamilov, Penn State,
discussing Cavitation Induced Fusion, that will
soon provide power generation and heat production.
- Christopher
Provaditis, from Greece, explaining
Inertial Propulsion and who teamed up recently with
Boeing for their space satellites.
- PJ Piper
of QM Power, discussing the
motor invented by Charles Flynn, with a revolutionary
parallel path that gives double and triple
efficiency.
- Dr Thorsten
Ludwig from Germany (GASE)
discussing the mysterious Hans Coler motor that WWII
British Intelligence researched.
|
|
| | | |