Power from the cold of space
-
From CP newsletter Generating Power on Earth From the Coldness of Deep Space - IEEE Spectrum[^] Presumably I am reading that wrong. "Energy harvesting using the cold of the universe is still under development." Best I can tell all of the examples are using the 'cold of the earth'. It has nothing to do with the universe. And not very efficiently either compared to other technologies. Obviously if the roof is covered with that then it is not covered with solar panels. The company mentioned, SkyCool, also claims the same thing on their site. https://www.skycoolsystems.com/technology/[^] "by rejecting heat into the cold universe." Far as I can see the system is using heat radiation (versus conduction and convection) to disperse the heat. Is there something in that to insure that it actually 'reaches' space? Versus of course just being absorbed into the atmosphere?
-
From CP newsletter Generating Power on Earth From the Coldness of Deep Space - IEEE Spectrum[^] Presumably I am reading that wrong. "Energy harvesting using the cold of the universe is still under development." Best I can tell all of the examples are using the 'cold of the earth'. It has nothing to do with the universe. And not very efficiently either compared to other technologies. Obviously if the roof is covered with that then it is not covered with solar panels. The company mentioned, SkyCool, also claims the same thing on their site. https://www.skycoolsystems.com/technology/[^] "by rejecting heat into the cold universe." Far as I can see the system is using heat radiation (versus conduction and convection) to disperse the heat. Is there something in that to insure that it actually 'reaches' space? Versus of course just being absorbed into the atmosphere?
thinking out loud without any idea of all of this works... could we harness the power of material contraction to generate energy in space ? There is a big temperature difference between being in the sun and in the shadow.
CI/CD = Continuous Impediment/Continuous Despair
-
From CP newsletter Generating Power on Earth From the Coldness of Deep Space - IEEE Spectrum[^] Presumably I am reading that wrong. "Energy harvesting using the cold of the universe is still under development." Best I can tell all of the examples are using the 'cold of the earth'. It has nothing to do with the universe. And not very efficiently either compared to other technologies. Obviously if the roof is covered with that then it is not covered with solar panels. The company mentioned, SkyCool, also claims the same thing on their site. https://www.skycoolsystems.com/technology/[^] "by rejecting heat into the cold universe." Far as I can see the system is using heat radiation (versus conduction and convection) to disperse the heat. Is there something in that to insure that it actually 'reaches' space? Versus of course just being absorbed into the atmosphere?
I'm glad I'm not the only one that noticed that seemed to be missing. I kept expecting them to have cord dangling from a satellite or something. It all just seemed to be handwavium.
TTFN - Kent
-
From CP newsletter Generating Power on Earth From the Coldness of Deep Space - IEEE Spectrum[^] Presumably I am reading that wrong. "Energy harvesting using the cold of the universe is still under development." Best I can tell all of the examples are using the 'cold of the earth'. It has nothing to do with the universe. And not very efficiently either compared to other technologies. Obviously if the roof is covered with that then it is not covered with solar panels. The company mentioned, SkyCool, also claims the same thing on their site. https://www.skycoolsystems.com/technology/[^] "by rejecting heat into the cold universe." Far as I can see the system is using heat radiation (versus conduction and convection) to disperse the heat. Is there something in that to insure that it actually 'reaches' space? Versus of course just being absorbed into the atmosphere?
jschell wrote:
Far as I can see the system is using heat radiation (versus conduction and convection) to disperse the heat. Is there something in that to insure that it actually 'reaches' space? Versus of course just being absorbed into the atmosphere?
Technically, that's not heat - as that requires not being in a "near vacuum" that space is. If heat is "just" the wobble of atomic particles, how do you radiate that into "nothing"? Abusing gravity might give more energy. This would generate "heat" (wobble of atoms) that might be harnessed. Getting cold from a vacuum is something we could actually test on earth - I'm looking forward to fridges and air conditioning based on the principle that you can get rid of heat using a near-vacuum :thumbsup:
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
-
From CP newsletter Generating Power on Earth From the Coldness of Deep Space - IEEE Spectrum[^] Presumably I am reading that wrong. "Energy harvesting using the cold of the universe is still under development." Best I can tell all of the examples are using the 'cold of the earth'. It has nothing to do with the universe. And not very efficiently either compared to other technologies. Obviously if the roof is covered with that then it is not covered with solar panels. The company mentioned, SkyCool, also claims the same thing on their site. https://www.skycoolsystems.com/technology/[^] "by rejecting heat into the cold universe." Far as I can see the system is using heat radiation (versus conduction and convection) to disperse the heat. Is there something in that to insure that it actually 'reaches' space? Versus of course just being absorbed into the atmosphere?
It sounds like a thin radiator. My garage is a cold universe in the middle of winter. Besides "block heaters", we used to have "car heaters" you would bolt under the dash and plug into a spare outlet. Then there were the "frost shields" you stuck on the windows for a hole to look out from. In warmer climates they would ask about your "bullet shielding" on the windows.
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
-
From CP newsletter Generating Power on Earth From the Coldness of Deep Space - IEEE Spectrum[^] Presumably I am reading that wrong. "Energy harvesting using the cold of the universe is still under development." Best I can tell all of the examples are using the 'cold of the earth'. It has nothing to do with the universe. And not very efficiently either compared to other technologies. Obviously if the roof is covered with that then it is not covered with solar panels. The company mentioned, SkyCool, also claims the same thing on their site. https://www.skycoolsystems.com/technology/[^] "by rejecting heat into the cold universe." Far as I can see the system is using heat radiation (versus conduction and convection) to disperse the heat. Is there something in that to insure that it actually 'reaches' space? Versus of course just being absorbed into the atmosphere?
Yes, they are claiming that their patented material emits infrared radiation in the 8-13 micrometer range that avoids the heat trapping molecules of the atmosphere. Basically, the night sky looks like a transparent window glass to these specific wavelengths of the electromagnetic spectrum. The net effect is to cool the emitting material down. During the day, the material needs to reflect at least 94% of all of the rest of the electromagnetic spectrum to keep the material from heating up and disturbing the cooling effect.
-
thinking out loud without any idea of all of this works... could we harness the power of material contraction to generate energy in space ? There is a big temperature difference between being in the sun and in the shadow.
CI/CD = Continuous Impediment/Continuous Despair
-
jschell wrote:
Far as I can see the system is using heat radiation (versus conduction and convection) to disperse the heat. Is there something in that to insure that it actually 'reaches' space? Versus of course just being absorbed into the atmosphere?
Technically, that's not heat - as that requires not being in a "near vacuum" that space is. If heat is "just" the wobble of atomic particles, how do you radiate that into "nothing"? Abusing gravity might give more energy. This would generate "heat" (wobble of atoms) that might be harnessed. Getting cold from a vacuum is something we could actually test on earth - I'm looking forward to fridges and air conditioning based on the principle that you can get rid of heat using a near-vacuum :thumbsup:
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
If heat is "just" the wobble of atomic particles, how do you radiate that into "nothing"?
The same way the Sun emits heat into nothing - through electromagnetic waves/particles.
The difficult we do right away... ...the impossible takes slightly longer.
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
If heat is "just" the wobble of atomic particles, how do you radiate that into "nothing"?
The same way the Sun emits heat into nothing - through electromagnetic waves/particles.
The difficult we do right away... ...the impossible takes slightly longer.
Richard Andrew x64 wrote:
The same way the Sun emits heat into nothing - through electromagnetic waves/particles.
That's not particles, is it? Show me a "electromagnetic waves/particles" that cools stuff? Radiation (which is more than magnetic kind, including x-ray, but not particles which have mass which waves don't have) is a form of energy; if it interacts with particles, it increases their "wobble", their temperature. Find me a wave that decreases a particles wobble? What wave does that? --edit Silly me did not say that the sun looses heat, in forms of radiations and photon emissions. Just one small thing; it uses trillions of nuclear explosions to do so. So yes, if you can generate that amount of heat, you may loose a bit due to radiation (and actual gravity, pushing away mass).
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
-
Richard Andrew x64 wrote:
The same way the Sun emits heat into nothing - through electromagnetic waves/particles.
That's not particles, is it? Show me a "electromagnetic waves/particles" that cools stuff? Radiation (which is more than magnetic kind, including x-ray, but not particles which have mass which waves don't have) is a form of energy; if it interacts with particles, it increases their "wobble", their temperature. Find me a wave that decreases a particles wobble? What wave does that? --edit Silly me did not say that the sun looses heat, in forms of radiations and photon emissions. Just one small thing; it uses trillions of nuclear explosions to do so. So yes, if you can generate that amount of heat, you may loose a bit due to radiation (and actual gravity, pushing away mass).
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
Light is not one or the other, a wave or a particle. Light acts like both at the same time. That's why you hear about radio "waves" at the same time that you hear about photons.
The difficult we do right away... ...the impossible takes slightly longer.
-
Light is not one or the other, a wave or a particle. Light acts like both at the same time. That's why you hear about radio "waves" at the same time that you hear about photons.
The difficult we do right away... ...the impossible takes slightly longer.
Light "behaves" as both, which does not mean it is neither one. Radio is a lot slower a wave. Fun fact; the first wave that aliens see, is a speech from Hitler coming from earth. The difference is important; not every wave is as fast as light, and light is not just a particle. It is, however, energy. You need to convert matter into light to loose "energy" and cool particles, and the particles need to be very agitated before they think even about radiating energy.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
-
Yes, they are claiming that their patented material emits infrared radiation in the 8-13 micrometer range that avoids the heat trapping molecules of the atmosphere. Basically, the night sky looks like a transparent window glass to these specific wavelengths of the electromagnetic spectrum. The net effect is to cool the emitting material down. During the day, the material needs to reflect at least 94% of all of the rest of the electromagnetic spectrum to keep the material from heating up and disturbing the cooling effect.
Or you put a mirror over it during the day. Now, please explain how IR interacts with magnetism? Yes, you could radiate energy away, by creating something that looks like a sun to nocturnal animals that can actually see IR. That implies loosing energy, not creating power.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
-
From CP newsletter Generating Power on Earth From the Coldness of Deep Space - IEEE Spectrum[^] Presumably I am reading that wrong. "Energy harvesting using the cold of the universe is still under development." Best I can tell all of the examples are using the 'cold of the earth'. It has nothing to do with the universe. And not very efficiently either compared to other technologies. Obviously if the roof is covered with that then it is not covered with solar panels. The company mentioned, SkyCool, also claims the same thing on their site. https://www.skycoolsystems.com/technology/[^] "by rejecting heat into the cold universe." Far as I can see the system is using heat radiation (versus conduction and convection) to disperse the heat. Is there something in that to insure that it actually 'reaches' space? Versus of course just being absorbed into the atmosphere?
jschell wrote:
Is there something in that to insure that it actually 'reaches' space?
Yes. As the article mentions, the radiation frequencies are chosen such that the atmosphere is completely transparent to the radiation. Hence it doesn't interact with the atmosphere and does actually radiate into space.
-
Richard Andrew x64 wrote:
The same way the Sun emits heat into nothing - through electromagnetic waves/particles.
That's not particles, is it? Show me a "electromagnetic waves/particles" that cools stuff? Radiation (which is more than magnetic kind, including x-ray, but not particles which have mass which waves don't have) is a form of energy; if it interacts with particles, it increases their "wobble", their temperature. Find me a wave that decreases a particles wobble? What wave does that? --edit Silly me did not say that the sun looses heat, in forms of radiations and photon emissions. Just one small thing; it uses trillions of nuclear explosions to do so. So yes, if you can generate that amount of heat, you may loose a bit due to radiation (and actual gravity, pushing away mass).
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Just one small thing; it uses trillions of nuclear explosions to do so. So yes, if you can generate that amount of heat, you may loose lose a bit due to radiation
The source of the energy is irrelevant. Anything above a temperature of absolute zero (that is everything) will radiate energy and it's "temperature" will drop, ultimately to infinitesimally above absolute zero. It's why the universe is expected to eventually be uniformly cold and dark.
-
Or you put a mirror over it during the day. Now, please explain how IR interacts with magnetism? Yes, you could radiate energy away, by creating something that looks like a sun to nocturnal animals that can actually see IR. That implies loosing energy, not creating power.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Now, please explain how IR interacts with magnetism?
The clue's in the name. IR is InfraRed radiation, which means it's ElectroMagnetic radiation with a frequency lower than the color Red.
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Just one small thing; it uses trillions of nuclear explosions to do so. So yes, if you can generate that amount of heat, you may loose lose a bit due to radiation
The source of the energy is irrelevant. Anything above a temperature of absolute zero (that is everything) will radiate energy and it's "temperature" will drop, ultimately to infinitesimally above absolute zero. It's why the universe is expected to eventually be uniformly cold and dark.
"Expected", is the correct term. It would mean that there's energy somewhere in a vacuum, innit? Wasn't that how this all started?
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Now, please explain how IR interacts with magnetism?
The clue's in the name. IR is InfraRed radiation, which means it's ElectroMagnetic radiation with a frequency lower than the color Red.
Isn't IR light, instead of being magnetic? I need to do some serious reading to catch back up on the topic :)
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
-
I'm glad I'm not the only one that noticed that seemed to be missing. I kept expecting them to have cord dangling from a satellite or something. It all just seemed to be handwavium.
TTFN - Kent
'Handwavium the head into the orifice of darkness...' - author unknown, but possibly me. I like your 'handwavium'!
Our Forgotten Astronomy | Object Oriented Programming with C++ | Wordle solver
-
Isn't IR light, instead of being magnetic? I need to do some serious reading to catch back up on the topic :)
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
Infrared and visible light, plus radio, UV, microwave, x-ray and gamma radiation are all electromagnetic waves at different frequencies. So they are all also photons with different energies.
-
Isn't IR light, instead of being magnetic? I need to do some serious reading to catch back up on the topic :)
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
IR and visible light are both forms of electromagnetic radiation. The only difference between then is that IR has a lower frequency (and longer wavelength).
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows. -- 6079 Smith W.
