Over a year and a half ago, I gave away a design for a new solar cell thought up by myself and a friend. We considered it an obvious advancement over the old design simply because it removed a series of successive layers in the cell design and replaced them with a prism and multiple solar cells tuned to different wavelengths to allow for better absorption.
We also suggested, in the same email, using carbon nanotubes to deal with an heat-induced electron over-excitation problem, and suspending the quantum dots used in the design in a solution to allow them to be printed directly onto a substrate. These suggestions would serve to increase the efficiency while decreasing the cost.
We made these suggestions in January 2006. I'd been in contact with Evident Technologies regarding the obvious flaws in their peltier element design and they'd fired back a white paper on their solar cells to inform me of the potential in their QD design. I don't believe they were at all expecting to recieve a new solar cell design back.
I've contacted the 'inventors' of our design, who claim this 'revolutionary breakthrough design paradigm' is their own creation. However, they won't share who thought up the idea or any other information.
I'm pissed. We thought we were being naive when we sent off the design. Surely there must be scientists with lists of degrees longer than my arms that have already been over these pathways and had the same thoughts, tested them and discounted them.
Apparently not.
And now they're going to sell these cells to the American Military to make them better and more efficient killing/policing machines.
Here's the text from every email I recieved and sent to Evident. I've bolded the specific suggestions that have since been implemented.
My name is Andrew Abbass and I'm... well, I'd like to say an amature physicist, but I'm pretty much an amature everything else as well. (Meaning I don't get paid.)
However, I've got this idea regarding a design for a peltier device that i believe is a step forwards in the field, but I haven't found a receptive ear to explain it to yet.
If you've time to spare to hear me out, I'd appreciate it. -Andrew Abbass
Andrew Abbass
Thu, Jan 5, 2006 at 5:09 PM
To: strouse@chem.ucsb.edu, fwise@ccmr.cornell.edu, company@nanocrystals.com, info@evidenttech.com, andrew.abbass@gmail.com
Hello,
I'd sent my original email a few days ago concerning a development in peltier designs, but i still have not recieved a response.
My interest isn't in the composition of the devices, but the orientation. I believe I've found something that's been overlooked in the designs that has instant and immediate applications in everything from computer cooling to home heating.
I'd like to speak further with a someone regarding this.
I await your response. -Andrew Abbass Newdor.com Media Inc.
[Quoted text hidden]
Amib2@aol.com
Thu, Jan 5, 2006 at 7:47 PM
To: andrew.abbass@gmail.com
Send me a phone no where I could call you. I may not be able to help you a great deal but I least I would be appreciate your vision.
Ramesh Bhargava
Andrew Abbass
Thu, Jan 5, 2006 at 9:14 PM
To: "Amib2@aol.com"
Hey,
It's not much of a vision yet. I just noticed something I'd never seen done with a peltier circuit.
I'm in Labrador, which is a long distance call no matter where you are, but you can if you want.
My number is (**********.
I've got three basic scematics that I think might serve a different purpose than current peltier device configurations. -Andrew Abbass
[Quoted text hidden]
Christian Seemann
Fri, Jan 6, 2006 at 11:35 AM
To: Andrew Abbass
Dear Andrew,
Thank you for your interest in our products. I apologize for not responding to you sooner. I would appreciate the ability to speak with you more about this application. Please contact me either by phone or email at your convenience. I look forward to future correspondence with you and to the development of an opportunity.
Best regards, Christian
Christian Seemann Nanomaterials Technical Inside Sales Representative Evident Technologies Inc. 216 River Street, Suite 200 Troy, NY 12180 USA T: 518-272-6266 x2214 F:518-273-6267
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail, including attachments, is for the sole use of the individual to whom it is addressed. This message is confidential and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and is exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy this message and its attachments.
[Quoted text hidden]
Andrew Abbass
Sun, Jan 8, 2006 at 1:35 PM
To: Amib2@aol.com, cseemann@evidenttech.com, andrew.abbass@gmail.com
Hello Gents,
Thank you for sparing the time to hear me out.
I've been taking my time trying to come up with a way to describe this, but I'm not really sure of the language I'll use. So... I'll just go ahead and run with what I've got and see if any of it makes sense.
I've been looking at peltier gates and their classical uses and wondering if the current generation of peltier devices have been designed with the wrong dimensions in mind. Currently, the devices are designed like a sandwich with a hotside and a cold side.
I'm wondering about the applications of this gate when used in as a 2 dimensional lattice. I've attached a basic design that I hope will help get the idea across. I've also got in mind another version that's Y-shaped with one element transfering heat into two seperate elements to increase the surface area the heat can be spread over and radiated away from. (I call that one a 'flux capacitor', although the makers of Back to the Future may want to claim the rights to that one.)
The version shown in the attached diagram I've dubbed an 'entropy wheel'. I haven't completed a test version yet, but if if works the way I think it will, a current in one direction should produce a net decrease in heat inside the central point of the diagram, while a current flowing in the other direction should produce a net increase in heat.
If my theory holds out, then I believe I've successfully suspended the 2nd law of thermodynamics by vectorizing entropy in an organized construct. There should also be a net increase or decrease in entropy in the area surrounding the circuit depending on the direction of the current flow to preserve the 1st Law, but the energy is being dispersed over a larger surface area.
-Andrew Abbass
Thanks for your time.
figure5.JPG 39K
Andrew Abbass
Mon, Jan 9, 2006 at 6:28 PM
To: Amib2@aol.com, cseemann@evidenttech.com, andrew.abbass@gmail.com
I've got more information on these devices. And I've worked out a few theories on what might be possible with them. This is just a general overview. I've put a bit of thought into it... I'd just like some confirmation from other sources. -Andrew
Andrew Abbass
Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 12:39 PM
To: Amib2@aol.com, cseemann@evidenttech.com
Any thoughts? -Andrew Abbass
Christian Seemann
Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 6:43 PM
To: Andrew Abbass
Dear Andrew,
This sounds very interesting; I'm assuming that you are interested in the possibility of incorporating our EviDots into your device and using them as semiconductor material. From what I have read I would recommend that you use either our CdSe or PbSe EviDots as both are known for their energy transfer abilities. I have attached a white paper on the use of these EviDots in Solar Cell Energy Conversion. I believe that you will find this paper to be informative and interesting. I look forward to you thoughts.
I've been conversing with a friend of mine over the information you sent me. We were very intrigued by your approaches towards improving the efficency of solar cells using your EviDots and the Gratzel cell.
Your story reminds me of one written by Robert A. Heinlein called "Let There Be Light". I believe you can find it to read in his book "The Man Who Sold The Moon". The story concerns itself with the invention of a sunscreen solar panel and our suggestions may have some similarities.
1. Use a carbon nanotube lattice combined with a modfied peltiercircuit to actively dampen your over-excitation problem. The nanotube lattice should be able to keep the phonon vibrations at a minimum,maintaining an optimum operating temperature.
2. Rather than stacking the different elements of your Gratzel cell,why not use a prism to break the light into individual spectrums soeach nanocrystal layer is absorbing it's own frequency directly?
The characters in the aforementioned story used a similar technique to obtain their efficency levels. I believe it may offer you a similar result.
I look forwards to your response. -Andrew Abbass
Andrew Abbass
Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 3:48 PM
To: Christian Seemann , andrew.abbass@gmail.com, "Amib2@aol.com"
Hello,
It's been a while since I've heard a response from either of you gentlemen.
I've pondering the general applications of p-n semiconductor junctions and have come to a number of conclusions, but am unable to justify my results without further labratory testing.
One conclusion is that thermal diodes will never be able to attain a much higher efficency rating that currently available. It's like trying to make water flow up a waterfall. I do have another thought on their uses, as well as applications for even the low efficency levels, but would require an investor to develop the technology required to manufacture the thermal lattice i've got in mind.
Christian, your solar cells still interest me, and I'm wondering if my thoughts on quartz diffraction for your gratzel cell were of any use.
My main thoughts seem to concern the orientation of each p-n junction in relation to the wavelengths they are attempting to absorb. It seems to me that if a peltier junction would operate more efficently in 2 dimensions as a heat spreader than it currently does in traditional peltier devices, maybe there's an efficency issue to be found in solar cells for the same reason. -Andrew Abbass
Frank Wise
Sat, Jan 21, 2006 at 8:46 PM
To: Andrew Abbass
I know almost nothing about the details of Peltier coolers, but I do know the main properties of QDs. If you want to run your thought by me or ask some questions I will try to help but I don't want to mismanage your expectations.
---------------------------------------------------------------- Frank Wise Department of Applied Physics 212 Clark Hall Cornell University Ithaca, NY 14853 T: (607) 255-1184 F: (607) 255-7658 fwise@ccmr.cornell.edu www.aep.cornell.edu/FFR/Faculty/Wise.html ----------------------------------------------------------------
[Quoted text hidden]
Andrew Abbass
Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 4:01 PM
To: Frank Wise
Hey Frank,
I've got a question for you. When manufacturing a device using yourQDs, can you suspend it in a solution to print the dots onto asubstrate as if you were printing with ink?
Because if you can, I think I've got a manufacturing process as wellas circuit designs for you that will cut your solar cells productioncosts down, increase their efficency, as well as give you a whole new type of solid state heat engine for spot cooling of CPUs... I've even got a few ideas for LEDs, thermal diodes, the new e-ink devices, etc...
Anyways, I'm looking forwards to a response. -Andrew Abbass
Andrew Abbass
Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 12:34 PM
To: Frank Wise , strouse@chem.ucsb.edu, company@nanocrystals.com, info@evidenttech.com
Hello,
I'm attempting to contact someone regarding some new applications for your nanocrystals in the areas of heat transfer gates, solar cells and cheaper manufacturing processes. I've been trying for months now and have yet to make a solid connection.
If someone out there would care to respond, I've been working on a unified field theory based around the actions of PN junctions on the quantum level. I think I've got it. -Andrew Abbass
Frank Wise
Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 9:43 PM
To: Andrew Abbass
We do not make any real devices. QDs are synthesized in solution, typically organic solvents. We can redisperse them in other solvents, and we can deposit them as films. Dots probably could be deposited or sprayed in a pattern. I don't know if anyone has done it nor the degree of control one would have.
[Quoted text hidden]
Andrew Abbass
Fri, Jan 27, 2006 at 2:47 AM
To: Frank Wise
Well, modern computer printers and produce a pretty fine dropletcontrol. As long as you could maintain a fairly decent regularity youcould deposit the dots in a 2 dimensional diode formation on a film? If it's already been printed with the necessary copper wiring you should be able to print quantum dot circuitry using two or more seperate tanks of QDs? Then you could seal the whole thing in one layer of laminate.
Just a thought. I'm interested in testing a few designs for solar cells and heat transfer devices using a new 2 dimensional pn-junction lattice instead of the traditional 3 dimensional designs. -Andrew Abbass
[Quoted text hidden]
Andrew Abbass
Sat, Jan 28, 2006 at 3:32 AM
To: Frank Wise
Hello Frank,
I did some looking, and there should be a way to provide for a relatively cheap conductive ink to use with the QDs in the printing process.
I on the topic of QDs though... do you have anyone on your staff that studies quantum mechanics? I've got some material I'd like to run by them if possible. -Andrew Abbass
[Quoted text hidden]
Frank Wise
Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 11:44 AM
To: Andrew Abbass
Yes, one of the benefits of colloidal synthesis is processability.
I don't recall if we discussed it, but there are people working on potential applications of nanocrystals based on thermoelectric properties.
[Quoted text hidden]
Andrew Abbass
Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 5:03 PM
To: Frank Wise
Well, I've been putting some thought into your QD products and their current applications.
I think your biggest stumbling block is that you're still working with a passive layered design which is expensive to manufacture and doesn't provide for much in the way of efficency.
I believe you have to change your stance towards designing a 2 dimensional light processing engine instead. This will mean that your energy collection process will be occuring at 90 degrees to your absorbtion process. This has already been shown to have a beneficial effect on solar cells.
This company has already make attempts using a nanospike technique, but I believe their just working on a middle ground step between the current layered design and a much more efficent 2 dimensional design.
Think of it more like a light transistor and you're getting closer to what i'm thinking about.
There's also a heat engine I've got in mind using a 2 dimensional version of a peltier gate. I'll go into more detail on that one with my next email. -Andrew Abbass
Andrew Abbass
Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 8:24 PM
To: Christian Seemann
Hey Christian,
I found something on the net that I think would apply to our earlier discussions about using your quantum dots in gratzel cells.
Using this holographic technique, you would be able to focus certainbands of light on certain portions of the gratzel cell, maximizingyour absorbtion ratios.
If you printed your gratzel cell as a single-dimensional superlatticein a two dimension space similar to the techniques used to printprocessors, you'd have a flat, easy to manufacture solar cell that youcould print onto a substrate using your dots.
Also, I don't know if you know this yet, but my hometown of Goose Bay, Labrador just became the world's largest supplier of high grade titanium oxide for use in these cells.
Damn greedy American Science Community, sucking on the teat of the American Military.
Thankfully, I saved the high output LED designs. I'd rather they didn't end up in the US Military's hands. Between that and the heat management system I've got in mind, these two components a key ingredients to producing efficient miniaturized solid state laser systems.
Maybe I'll give it to the Chinese just to be a prick.
The Zune Scene and Slashdot are reporting that the Zune Marketplace DRM is now broken and 100% removable.
There was a real precedent set with the Weedshare incident. Two 'security upgrades', supposedly to protect the Zune Marketplace, were the official reason that SML closed it's doors. The fact that this can occur should shake the faith any might have in a digital media marketlace. Should the marketplace gain acceptance, simple software updates could trigger the next Great Depression. There has to be a mandated responsibility to the public.
Now that this protection has been broken as well, can we break through to daylight and try to examine this subject above the table and in full public view.
After half a dozen rejected submissions to Slashdot, someone else finally got the MS patent mentioned, although for different reasons than I'd have highlighted.
