-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is available! Price is $250 ea (shipped within CONUS).
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/
Nepali Teenager Invents Unusual Solar Panel
- Thread starter Xmodius
- Start date
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2006
- Messages
- 3,724
Neato.
Years ago, I recall a TV show where human hair was demonstrated as having excellent absorbency for oil spills.
Years ago, I recall a TV show where human hair was demonstrated as having excellent absorbency for oil spills.
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2008
- Messages
- 2,165
And the same to you for posting the link ... it a real good news story!:thumbup:
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2002
- Messages
- 2,845
Interesting idea. It has some plausible elements. As usual with popular media coverage of science stories, there are huge gaps in the details. The pictures don't quite add up though - it looks like a tiny bit of hair generating a lot of power. This would make a sunny day at the beach quite electric (literally).
Maybe there's more to his device. If it worked, I wouldn't necessarily want the secrets revealed to the world - some company probably put 50 engineers on the problem, and is setting up a prototype assembly line in China starting tomorrow. If it's a hoax, I hope he at least uses the publicity to get a quality education and learn more about the energy problem. He certainly has a gift, and his intelligence will be an asset to Nepal whether or not he brings hair solar cells to every village.
Maybe there's more to his device. If it worked, I wouldn't necessarily want the secrets revealed to the world - some company probably put 50 engineers on the problem, and is setting up a prototype assembly line in China starting tomorrow. If it's a hoax, I hope he at least uses the publicity to get a quality education and learn more about the energy problem. He certainly has a gift, and his intelligence will be an asset to Nepal whether or not he brings hair solar cells to every village.
Nice idea but it's a scam. The reason solar panels are so expensive is that you need very pure silicon to make them work efficiently. I watched a video on how solar panels are made and it is a precise science. If it could be done with lower grade silicon, they would be doing it. Also, in the photos on the site, why are the panels working indoors, in dark places? Solar panels need lots of direct sunlight.
YOu know, I looked into the "hoax" allegations some time ago, and I find them more suspicious than the story itself.
While some legitimately believe that the young man may be honestly wrong, only one person is really asserting outright fraud. That man is a mysterious man named Edward Craig Wyatt, apparently an out-of-work electrical engineer from Durham, NC. I've found him on at least 5, separate comment boards, each one with more hysterical accusations than the last, suggesting that he is waging an obsessive, one-man campaign against the story. Meanwhile, every other mention of a possible hoax either includes a link back to Hyatt's debunking site, or has someone who quotes his points verbatim.
You see, Hyatt put up a massive, debunking page on his professional site (please note), seemingly within a day or two of the original story breaking. This alone makes me suspicious, partly from wondering how he got the material so fast, and partly because he put it not on a public discussion forum, but on the site where he advertises for work, suggesting that he is stirring up controversy to promote himself professionally, rather than to further the cause of science. Moreover, the fact of how all of his mysterious supporters sound just like him, and each other, leaves me wondering who REALLY wrote those posts.
Further research on the guy reveals that he's someone who worked for more than 20 years in Durham's "Research Triangle," and that his one, major accomplishment was patenting a connector for the hands-free device on a cell phone, which he sold to Sony. This being a far less radical advance than the invention Hyatt is criticizing, I suspect a degree of professional jealousy of a seemingly uneducated, 19-year-old kid from an impoverished country, who allegedly outdid him. I've also found his name on an Amazon booklist, where he touts a selection of favorite books on the faults and limitations of the human brain, and expresses optimism that we can create something far superior through technology. This would indicate a cynical view of human intelligence, and he's probably convinced himself that anyone who disagrees with him is a crackpot, or part of "mass hysteria."
I would emphasize, again, that this man is the ONLY person alleging outright fraud, going as far to claim that the photos are posed, that the panel hides an electric battery (without providing any proof of this, mind you), and asserting that the young inventor will go to prison for fraud. And he is doing so without the time-honored practice of peer review: he has made not attempted to replicate the experiment, and see if it works. He simply refuses to believe that it could work, parroting the results of prior experiments, and makes without providing evidence. I think that Edward Craig Hyatt is simply incensed that anyone could invent this if he can't, and that if anyone even thinks so, it's all part of a conspiracy. And he is attempting, out of spite, to promote his own career at his imaginary rival's expense.
While some legitimately believe that the young man may be honestly wrong, only one person is really asserting outright fraud. That man is a mysterious man named Edward Craig Wyatt, apparently an out-of-work electrical engineer from Durham, NC. I've found him on at least 5, separate comment boards, each one with more hysterical accusations than the last, suggesting that he is waging an obsessive, one-man campaign against the story. Meanwhile, every other mention of a possible hoax either includes a link back to Hyatt's debunking site, or has someone who quotes his points verbatim.
You see, Hyatt put up a massive, debunking page on his professional site (please note), seemingly within a day or two of the original story breaking. This alone makes me suspicious, partly from wondering how he got the material so fast, and partly because he put it not on a public discussion forum, but on the site where he advertises for work, suggesting that he is stirring up controversy to promote himself professionally, rather than to further the cause of science. Moreover, the fact of how all of his mysterious supporters sound just like him, and each other, leaves me wondering who REALLY wrote those posts.
Further research on the guy reveals that he's someone who worked for more than 20 years in Durham's "Research Triangle," and that his one, major accomplishment was patenting a connector for the hands-free device on a cell phone, which he sold to Sony. This being a far less radical advance than the invention Hyatt is criticizing, I suspect a degree of professional jealousy of a seemingly uneducated, 19-year-old kid from an impoverished country, who allegedly outdid him. I've also found his name on an Amazon booklist, where he touts a selection of favorite books on the faults and limitations of the human brain, and expresses optimism that we can create something far superior through technology. This would indicate a cynical view of human intelligence, and he's probably convinced himself that anyone who disagrees with him is a crackpot, or part of "mass hysteria."
I would emphasize, again, that this man is the ONLY person alleging outright fraud, going as far to claim that the photos are posed, that the panel hides an electric battery (without providing any proof of this, mind you), and asserting that the young inventor will go to prison for fraud. And he is doing so without the time-honored practice of peer review: he has made not attempted to replicate the experiment, and see if it works. He simply refuses to believe that it could work, parroting the results of prior experiments, and makes without providing evidence. I think that Edward Craig Hyatt is simply incensed that anyone could invent this if he can't, and that if anyone even thinks so, it's all part of a conspiracy. And he is attempting, out of spite, to promote his own career at his imaginary rival's expense.
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2002
- Messages
- 2,845
I don't think he's claiming to use silicon. I'm not an expert on solar cells, but you need very pure silicon to serve as a base for a very precise arrangement of atoms with specific electrical properties in specific places (termed "doping"). If you have impurities much above parts per million, the charges start flowing around randomly and you don't get as much electricity out. There are different types of silicon out there, and the higher purity crystalline stuff generally gives better solar cells and costs more. Lower grades of silicon are used, based on usual cost/benefit concerns.
Here, we are not talking about silicon at all. The claim (roughly described with no real technical details) is that hair absorbs light, and produces electricity. Living systems are very good at making very pure, highly ordered substances with properties that can be superior to man-made materials. Sea shells, for example, are much harder and more durable than you would expect from the materials. Also plants get energy from light using photosynthesis, which is more efficient than most current solar technology (couldn't find comparable measurements for both systems, but looks like silicon solar cells are about 6-40% efficient depending on type, and plants are about 25% efficient).
So I think your point about silicon is comparing apples to oranges, since he is not claiming silicon was used. Also, I think that a living creature could theoretically create a structure that is as pure and well-ordered as a silicon solar cell.
First photo is obviously outside. The photo in the barbershop doesn't show the power generating device, so it could be outside. The photo in the house has the panel in the lower left corner, which looks like outside. The photo with the volt meter is unclear. It is difficult to judge light levels from a photo, as the camera compensates to obtain a good exposure. In any case, they could be running the actual bulb from a storage battery, with the battery being slowly charged by the panel. Most solar systems use some sort of battery storage so you can have power when the sun doesn't shine. Journalists have done less honest things than using the panel as a prop when it's not actually lighting the bulb. (look in any fashion magazine!)
I'm still pretty skeptical of the story, but not for the reasons you suggest. I bet there is some small effect, but not enough to serve as a useful power source, sort of like why we haven't switched to lemon batteries as an alternative power source. There really isn't enough information in the article to critique the device. Fun to think about though.
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2002
- Messages
- 2,845
Regarding Edward Craig Hyatt:
OK, I read his website and find all of his scientific arguments credible. http://sites.google.com/site/edwardcraighyatt/hairsolarpanelnepal
Others are similarly critical, as seen here. Mr. Hyatt has a comment listed, and while I would hesitate to call teenagers "liars" without proof of intentional fraud, it's not so bad as internet comments go. Other individuals have concerns and criticisms on the same lines.
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Talk:OS:Human_Hair_Solar_Panel_by_Milan_Karki
True, his name seems to show up everywhere. The easy explanation is that he googled the article, and replied on every discussion list, which would be less work than the webpage at the top, which required a significant amount of work. I don' think he's out to tear down a Nepali kid, I think he's out to tear down bad science in the rich tradition of hoax-busting. Better to debunk the myth when it's small before everyone thinks you can get solar cells for $5 at the barber shop 8) He doesn't seem any more fanatical than the average poster on a Bladeforums thread about Lynn Thompson. Imagine the pain that would've been saved if we'd debunked the rumor that Cold Steel made good knives.
Even if these guys didn't make something that works, I applaud them for trying and hope they can parlay 15 minutes of fame into something better.
OK, I read his website and find all of his scientific arguments credible. http://sites.google.com/site/edwardcraighyatt/hairsolarpanelnepal
Others are similarly critical, as seen here. Mr. Hyatt has a comment listed, and while I would hesitate to call teenagers "liars" without proof of intentional fraud, it's not so bad as internet comments go. Other individuals have concerns and criticisms on the same lines.
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Talk:OS:Human_Hair_Solar_Panel_by_Milan_Karki
True, his name seems to show up everywhere. The easy explanation is that he googled the article, and replied on every discussion list, which would be less work than the webpage at the top, which required a significant amount of work. I don' think he's out to tear down a Nepali kid, I think he's out to tear down bad science in the rich tradition of hoax-busting. Better to debunk the myth when it's small before everyone thinks you can get solar cells for $5 at the barber shop 8) He doesn't seem any more fanatical than the average poster on a Bladeforums thread about Lynn Thompson. Imagine the pain that would've been saved if we'd debunked the rumor that Cold Steel made good knives.
Even if these guys didn't make something that works, I applaud them for trying and hope they can parlay 15 minutes of fame into something better.
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2003
- Messages
- 3,409
lemon powered clock:
lemon powered light:
'nother light:
having it's lemon replaced.
Last edited:
I suppose what mean to say is, that I'll listen to criticism of this theory (which does sound a little too good to be true.), but NOT from Edward Craig Hyatt. For I consider the way a person makes their point to be inseparable from the soundness of their logic; people who are right do not need to behave badly.
I disagree. First, I find many "debunkers" to be highly biased and hostile individuals, who often stick to their refusal to believe, even after the evidence turns against them. They can be every bit as prejudiced as true believers. Perhaps I've grown cynical, but to picture someone on a tear like this as objective and altruistic is simply inconceivable to me.
Second, he *is* on a tear, and a very aggressive one at that. His unproven allegations of outright fraud simply cannot be excused, nor explained by any other means than personal animosity. I won't excuse that, and frankly, it frightens me.
Hyatt strikes me as a very unpleasant, aggressive, and vindictive man, and I don't think that someone like that can think clearly enough to contribute meaningfully to a scientific debate. I'll listen to criticism of this story, but not from HIM.:thumbdn:
I disagree. First, I find many "debunkers" to be highly biased and hostile individuals, who often stick to their refusal to believe, even after the evidence turns against them. They can be every bit as prejudiced as true believers. Perhaps I've grown cynical, but to picture someone on a tear like this as objective and altruistic is simply inconceivable to me.
Second, he *is* on a tear, and a very aggressive one at that. His unproven allegations of outright fraud simply cannot be excused, nor explained by any other means than personal animosity. I won't excuse that, and frankly, it frightens me.
Hyatt strikes me as a very unpleasant, aggressive, and vindictive man, and I don't think that someone like that can think clearly enough to contribute meaningfully to a scientific debate. I'll listen to criticism of this story, but not from HIM.:thumbdn:
Why doesn't someone with a little experience with this kind of thing try to duplicate the experiment? I still seriously doubt that this would produce any decent amount of electricity. I am going a bit on gut feeling here and I would love to be proven wrong.....
I suspect that this is what's going on, right now, and that's why the story has been quiet for a while.
The inventor didn't say that it produced much power. In fact, quite the opposite: only enough to charge some small batteries overnight.
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2002
- Messages
- 2,845
Hyatt cites some simple tests - hooking up the volt meter to strands of hair, for example - and some published articles about melanin from hair absorbing solar energy. Nothing previously suggests that this sort of thing should work. If it does, there's a serious new development that's not obvious and not adequately explained in the news articles.
Nicholas - I respect your reading of Hyatt, even though I disagree with it. The fact that he raises legitimate concerns puts him above the average troll behavior I've seen. He's not always entirely nice or diplomatic, but he is going up against a world-wide press service who's article seems to be getting wide reproduction without much fact checking or criticism. One non-celebrity is going to have to shout pretty loud to be heard against the inertia of the BBC or AP wire or what not. If he hadn't posted in multiple forums, we probably wouldn't be discussing him. I do agree with Hyatt that free energy type frauds hurt legitimate research. How often do people spend money on dubious energy projects that were debunked long ago - like the various fuel additives and engine accessories that are supposed to increase fuel efficiency?
As I said, calling someone a liar or a fraud is a pretty serious accusation, and not to be made lightly. It is curious that this device seems similar in size to a silicon solar cell. Putting hair over a silicon solar cell and claiming the hair generated the electricity would seem to constitute deliberate fraud, even to a high-school student with minimal education, so Hyatt has a plausible scenario under which the Nepali individuals could be shown to intentionally be making false claims. Without better information - examination of the actual device, success of a similar experiment, a better model for why it might work, info that Hyatt has millions of bucks invested in silicon solar cells, etc. - I have to give both Hyatt and the students the benefit of the doubt as to their motivations.
Anyway, I'm kind of disappointed that there hasn't been any more follow-up on the original July story and September revival. If these devices are as simple as claimed, they should've been able to make at least a few more and power some more homes or maybe a village.