Re: Attn: Mr. Mook

Absolutely fascinating.

:-)

On Jan 8, 2:11 am, william.m...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Jan 5, 2:14 pm, BradGuth <bradg...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

This ongoing rant is all perfectly well and good.  

There is a person posting as Mr. Mook - that is not me!  lol.

However, what
exactly is it about spare/surplus energy that you still do not
understand?

That you say this points directly to the fact there is much you have
yet to understand.

The cost of today's primary energy has much to do with supply and
demand - as supplies of coal, natural gas and crude oil are limited.
The CO2 levels in the atmosphere also pose another sort of limit to
their unrestrained use.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves

The cost of alternative energy sources has to do with capital costs.
The recurring cost of energy for nuclear and solar sources (solar is
ultimately nuclear, and wind is a form of solar energy) is nil - the
real factor is the total capital cost of power and the time value of
money and the longevity and maintenance costs of that capital.

Consider,

A barrel of crude oil contains 6.1 GJ of thermal energy when burned
and produces 417 kg of CO2 when burned.  At a cost of $30.50 per
barrel, that's 200 MJ per $1 - or $5 per GJ and 68.4 kg CO2 per GJ.

Now consider a nuclear reactor that operates 8,700 hours per year.  A
year's operation of a kilowatt of thermal capacity produce 8.7 MWh of
thermal energy.  Each MWh contains 3.6 GJ of energy, so in a year this
hardware produces 31.32 GJ of thermal energy.

A nuclear reactor that costs $5,000 kilowatt capacity, and has a life
span of 50 years, in a market with a discount rate of 5%, and a
maintenance cost of 3% purchase price, as the following annual costs;

          $273.88 - capital expense per year
          $150.00 - maintenance costs per year

          $423.88 - total cost per year

So, dividing the 31.32 GJ of thermal energy int $423.88 obtains $13.53
per GJ or 73.9 MJ per $1.00

nearly 3x as expensive as the oil at $30.50 per barrel.  or equal to
oil at $100 per barrel on a heat basis.

Now, since power levels of nuclear reactions can be arbitrarily large,
just consider Tsar Bomba;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_bomba

the cost of nuclear POWER may become arbitrarily low.  This is what
led experts such as Lewis Straus to say in 1954 that nuclear power
would one day be too cheap to meter.  Consider the nuclear lightbulb -
a nuclear filament operating in a vacuum tube at a temperature equal
to that of a light filament.  A filament glowing at a temperature that
allows most of the energy to be transferred optically to a bandgap
matched PV cell.  The bulb is also equipped with an optical bandpass
filter that reflects ineffective photons to the filament, recycling
the energy, so that overall efficiency of this system approaches
unity;

http://trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov/dspace/bitstream/2014/36447/1/93-1911.pdfhttp://trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov/dspace/bitstream/2014/28070/1/95-0049.pdf

To get reasonable cost estimates we have to look at specifics.

So, we use silicon, with a bandgap energy equal to 1,108 nm - a
nuclear filament with a temperature of 2,342.3 C (2,615.5K) - produces
peak output at that wavelength.  So, a 1 million Watt system requires
a filament with a 3,768 sq cm filament according to Stephan
Boltzman.

A sphere 34.63 cm in diameter inside a spherical glass vessel 5 meters
in diameter, equipped with a dichroic filter that passes photons
between 700 nm and 1,108 nm - and reflects all others back to the
filament.

The filament is a thin shell of HEU contained in a ceramic surrounding
a core whose neutron cross section may be varied.  Outside the light
bulb - beyond the bandpass filter, there is a sphere of silicon PV
cells with a total area of 78.5 sq m - operating at 12.7x solar
intensity.   Outside the PV layer, is another containment vessel with
a surface that has a variable neutron cross section.  The variable
neutron cross section surfaces - both inner and outer, are MEMs based
and highly reliable and quite safe.

The major cost of the system is the PV cell.  That's $122,000.  The
cost of the HEU is $60,000 - and the cost of all other components,
$18,000 - that's $200,000 for a megawatt.  The system masses less than
1 metric ton - 1 kilowatt per kg and $200 per kilowatt.  This power to
weight is better than most engines - so this could be used in a
nuclear powered craft of nearly any type spacecraft, aircraft, ship,
sub, tank, truck, office, apartment block, you name it.

Operating non-stop 24/7 - 8766 hours per year, this is the the same
output as the traditional nuclear reactor operating with 3% uranium -
but at 1/25th the capital cost - also, with no sensible moving parts
(the MEMs based neutron control is solid state) so maintenance cost is
nonexistant.   So; the same number of gigajoules as the kilowatt
above, is produced at

     $10.96 - capital cost/yr
         -      - maintenance cost/yr

     $10.96 - total cost/yr

That's $0.35 per GJ - 2.85 GJ per $1.00 - over 14x the energy per
dollar as a barrel of crude at $30 per barrel - approaching $2 per
barrel!!!  Not quite cheap enough not to meter, but certainly, a
revolutionary development in energy production.  One that has been
consistently avoided - for the past 50 years.

This is inexpensive enough to produce hydrogen from water which can
then be used as a primary fuel, or hydrogen combined with low-rank
carbon to make synfuels at competitive costs.

Speaking of high intensity photocells used in the nuclear light bulb -
they have been around for decades too!

http://www.photovolt.us/PVSC_paper_PhotoVolt.pdf

first run float silicon as PV material costs $1 per square inch.  At
1,000x solar intensity, this material is 18% efficient, and with
appropriate optical bandpass filter - is easily kept cool;

http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/7081584.html

and with innovative optics, the PV costs dominate;

http://www.freshpatents.com/Solar-panels-with-liquid-superconcentrato...

There are 1,550 square inches in a square meter - so at $1 per sq
inch, we have $1,550 per square meter.  The solar constant at Earth's
surface is around 1,000 watts per square meter, and at 18% efficiency,
we have 180 watts electrical per square meter.  At $1,550 per square
meter this is $8.61 per peak watt.

Conventional solar panels use polysilicon, or recycled silicon to
lower costs to around $4 per peak watt.

By concentrating 1,000x - and using the techniques described in my
patents, along with Bernie's VMJ approach, we reduce costs to less
than $0.01 per peak watt!!!   That's $10 per kilowatt.  With zero
moving parts (a solid state tracker is part of the ultra-low-cost
optics) - maintenance is $0 - as above -so annual costs for the
capital equipment is;

    $0.54 per kilowatt-year

Now, in many locations in North America, sunlight is available from
1,300 hours to 1,700 hours per year - an average of 1,500 hours per
year.   In a year, this means each kilowatt produces 1.5 MWh per year
- that's 5.4 GJ per year.   This is 10 GJ per $1.00 - or $0.10  per
GJ.  This is equal to $0.61 per barrel oil equivalent cost!!!
Fabulously inexpensive!!  Anything that can be done with nuclear light
bulbs can be achieved with properly designed CPV systems such as mine!

http://www.osti.gov/bridge/servlets/purl/799231-TbPfOB/native/799231.PDF

Once Earth is flooded or saturated with yourMookH2 and  LH2, then
what?

Then the cost of energy begins to decline - resuming the 5% per year
downward trend that applied from 1860 through 1960.   This decrease in
energy costs reverses the 50 year trend of 8% per year price increases
from 1960 to present.  All social political and economic progress in
the industrial age, prior to 1970, occurred as a result of ever lower
primary energy costs.  All social political and economic stagnation -
despite radical improvements in productivity due to factors such as
communications and automation - occurred as a result of ever higher
primary energy costs.  Basically, the radical improvements in
productivity wrought by modern electronics advance resulted in a huge
transfer of wealth to oil owners.  Those owners have used every means
at their disposal to maintain ever increasing stock value, despite
reductions in their underlying reserves - primarily through engineered
increases in energy prices - regardless of the ultimate cost to
society.

Abundant low cost energy, produced at every lower costs, and in ever
greater amounts, will restore the continuing improvement of human
happiness brought about by ever more efficient application of
industrial technique.  For those who say this is environmental
suicide, it is important to note that environmental efforts are
something wealthy societies purchase with their wealth - and poor
societies are ill suited to take care of the environment.  Abundant
low cost energy is the basis of all wealth in an industrial society.
High temperature nuclear reactors, and CPV are the first step toward
the path we abandoned in 1960 - after the asassination of JFK and the
installment of Richard Nixon (JFK beat Nixon in 1960, JFK was killed
in 1963, and Nixon installed in 1968)

It’s like the Rn222 of radium,

There is insufficient Rn gas to provide significant power.  The power
level achieved with Rn is so low as to be impractical.  You have not
yet learned the difference between radioactive decay and fission - and
why its important.

or the He3 of natural gas, whereas

Similar problems and different problems.  First off, despite that fact
that Helium 3 fusion is aneutronic, Helium 3 fusion is harder to
achieve than Deuterium Tritium fusion and since DT fusion has not yet
reached break even, the idea that He3 provides some magical means to
fusion energy is ludicrous and ignorant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aneutronic_fusion

Further, He3 is very very rare!   While not as rare as radon - there's
not much energy there!

It makes a lot more sense to use another anuetronic source, like
boron, or lithium-6 deuteride.  Even then, those far more abundant
species don't occur in quantities sufficient to equal our limited oil
supply - so, saying they are a solution to our energy supply problem
is again ludicrous and ignorant!  (even if you had a fusion reactor
that achieved break-even with these aneutronic materials - which we
don't!)

neither of these nifty elements has to be utilized,

Even if they were used - they would not be cost-effective nor would
they be sufficiently abundant to make a damn bit of difference to our
energy picture.  D-D reactions are something different however;
there's plenty of that on Earth - and if we could achieve that - it
would be AWESOME - unfortunately, there is no known way to achieve
this sort of reaction - but that doesn't stop people from trying -
which is a good thing - there's just nothing we can bet our future on
here - yet - but if it is ever solved, it will be the natural
successor to the two technologies described above.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deuterium

but I’d think Chu
and others might agree that it’s certainly a darn good shame that
we’re not.

Since anyone with an ounce of sense and knowledge knows the things
I've stated here, they would not agree with your assessment which is
wrong on many levels.

 Are you planning to just dump whatever spare/surplusMook
energy into the atmosphere,

I build very low cost CPV systems.  The highest best use of these
systems today, given the huge balance of system costs in connecting a
variable DC power source to a variable AC power load - is to make
hydrogen from water by variable electrolysis - and then use hydrogen
to fire stationary power plants, then, take the low rank carbon fuels
stranded by this process and convert those to high rank hydrocarbon
fuels by combining them with additional hydrogen at each of these
plants.  In this way the carbon footprint of the world may be cut in
half, a large hydrogen infrastructure is paid for by commercial
operations, and the amount of oil in the world may be increased by
150%.

Beyond this, expand the CPV systems to displace all hydrocarbon fuels
with hydrogen fuels.  As the total area of CPV panels approaches
200,000 sq miles, augment the ground based arrays with GEO based solar
pumped lasers to beam band gap matched energy to CPV arrays -
improving their output by 16x - while limiting the total CPV area.
More advanced systems, with improved beam steering, then beam energy
directly to users.  Next, powersats orbiting inside the orbit of
Mercury beam very powerful shortwave lasers to GEO based laser
reforming satellites for longer wave beaming to legacy systems as well
as systems that beam energy directly to users in 100x the earlier
space based system - 1600x today's level.

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplore/login.jsp?url=/iel5/7260/26752/0119....http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/302/5650/1537

NOTE: Negative refractive index gives rise to inverse doppler shift,
which when combined in appropriate metamaterials to change the
wavelength of photons moving through materials.  When combined with
optical sorting technology (GBO)

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/287/5462/2451?ck=nck&s....

such techniques have the potential to create very efficient solar
pumped lasers - approaching 100% efficiency!

* * *

Finally, efficient solar pumped anti-matter production occuring near
the solar surface is used to harvest solar energy on a massive scale,
and anti-proton beams multiply the power of gamma ray beams - and
which allows the easy storage of solar energy in antimatter
containments off-world.  (gamma rays above 0.551 MeV naturally decay
to positron/electron pairs)

so as to maintain an artificially inflated
cartel price?

The oil companies will go the way of coal and lumber companies very
soon.

http://www.ohiochamber.com/governmental/pdfs/William%20Mook_021308.pdf



If the h2o2 product were to be created viaMookand other green/
renewable energy that's in spare/surplus, what the hell does it matter
how much energy it takes to safely create, easily store and deliver
those 10 million tonnes/year of 70+% h2o2 to the global end-users?

There is always an optimal way that will displace sub-optimal ways.
It is clear looking at the fundamentals that h2o2 will easily displace
the present day $71 billion battery market.  It is equally clear that
h2o2 has the potential to find a solid footing in short range low
power mobility, and portable robotics applications - which could grow
to substantial levels.  ALL chemically based fuels will be displaced
by advanced power beaming methods within 100 years - but unless you
plan to live well beyond 100 years - you could be a billionaire - you
are at the right place and the right time.  So, go for it!  All you
need is a low cost MEMs based turbine that makes use of a h2o2 gas
generator.

(same argument goes for whateverMooksynfuel via fossil, bio or even
CO2 alternatives)

no, my system would be a non-starter if it could not produce synfuel
at less cost than today's market price for conventional fuel.  ditto
for the advanced systems described.   GEO based solar powersat
requires launch costs and conversion efficiencies to fall within a
specific range of values to augment the terrestrial systems
described.  Sun orbiting solar power systems must make certain
advances.  Anti-matter based systems go through a whole series of
innovations - starting with positron/electron pairs and ending with
proton/anti-proton pairs - all made sufficiently efficiently and at
low enough cost per unit POWER - to knock off the earlier
technology.

The point is, that whomever dominates the energy supplies of an
earlier era, they embrace the new technology, despite short term
losses, so that society may continue to advance.

In this way, we have the means to live at very high living standards,
and with AI surpassing human levels, and the ability to harvest
material from across the solar system - the future is so bright you've
got to wear shades

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvIAyxpjEuc

as Timbuk3 is fond of saying - I favor Maui Jim's by the way - and the
beaches of Moorea.

Today communication throughout the world is instantaneous.  Within 40
years, we should see any material human need, any need, or material
desire - instantaneously fulfilled - providing there are no negative
third party effects - which is easily taken care of through a seamless
AI system.

The shortages and difficulties we face today are entirely derived from
a total lack of imagination on the one hand, a deep seated fear of
special interests on the other - and a population largely ignorant of
what is possible, mislead by disinformation specialists in ways that
make it difficult to distinguish between what is possible and what is
not, what is the logical next step and what is more remote.

You were planning on giving us terawatts of green/renewable energy,
were you not?

Ken Arrow recieved a Nobel Prize in 1972 for his works related to
Social Choice and Individual Value;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Arrow

here he proved that the voting and economic systems we take for
granted work no better than the Royal Rights of Kings worked, and are
subject to failure.  This derives from the fact that individual values
are non-transitive while scalars are transitive, and we use scalars to
make social choices.

Wasily Leontief received a Nobel Price in 1973 related to his input-
output method of econometric analysis

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wassily_Leontief

in many ways, Leontief's work was an answer to Arrow's work.  His
productive function created a sort of vector currency, that if widely
distributied as an electronic wealth symbol would subsume our present
scalar methods, and resolve Arrow's paradox.

This again creates fear among specialists who exercise power through
Arrow's paradox.  They call Arrow's Impossibility Theorem a paradox
because specialists controlling seemingly inconsequential aspects of
voting and buying, control the result of YOUR decisions, even though
YOU make all the decisions!!

To understand how this works, you really need to read Arrow's Social
Choice and Individual Values and really and truly understand it.

The point is, Leontief answers Arrow - and the internet, combined with
powerful PDAs provide a convenient mechanism to bring about a subtle
but powerful way for all people everywhere to organize their behavior
in a truly rational way -

In short - within 40 years - our children will look back in perplexity
at our primitive age of shortages selfishness, horror pain and death -
and wonder what evil caused us to delay generations between obvious
easy solutions to al difficulties.

One thing I would like to achieve once I start making a few bucks in
the energy biz, is to orbit 600+ satellites in MEO - sunsynch polar
orbits.  The satellites communicate with one another via open optical
laser beams, and communicate with the ground via broadband phased
array antennae on each comsat.  Using GPS virtual stationary cells are
painted on the Earth, and broadband global communications with very
inexpensive chipsets is enabled.  Here not only communications, and
internet functions are enabled, but also banking functions - and with
powerful low cost PDAs - Leontief analysis - implementing a version of
vector currency.

This is how third party effects are seamlessly and rationally resolved
totally automatically - especially as AI is developed.

To get an idea of how this works consider breathing.  Oxygen on Earth
is made by totally automatic solar powered processes without any human
time or attention being paid to it whatever.  For that reason oxygen
is taken for granted and should anyone try to deny another the right
to breathe - that is tantamount to murder.

Our children's children will view EVERYTHING the way we view breathing
- and as a result - they will not understand ANYTHING we say today-
not one word.  It will be a total mystery.   Much of what we all take
for granted as reality will be considered a form of madness - clearly
the result of poor upbringing in a primitive uncivilized world.

Also enabled, with this first generation system is tele-robotics - so
people may work anywhere and live anywhere else - even before powerful
AI.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telerobotic

This well before 2020 - so as AI develops factors will be in place to
easily adopt AI

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligence

everything is in place for a seamless transition to the sort of world
I describe here.

Which is important when you consider failure modes;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berserker_(Saberhagen)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gray_goo

This development occurs at the same time we tap into material
resources of captured asteroids - solar powered factories on orbit
operated by remote control - and aging control becomes widespread -

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/aubrey_de_grey_says_we_can_avoid_a...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aubrey_de_Grey

Now this brings about another sea change in the way people think and
feel about things.   Born into an era where everyone dies, creates a
sort of mindset where death is accepted.  So, no one makes it out
alive.  That means, its only a matter of WHEN - and this impacts all
our ideas about life.  What about being born into an era where death
and disease do not exist?   People will tend to value life more.

Something similar happened in the 19th century.  At the beginning of
the 19th century - anesthetics did not exist.  They were developed in
the first quarter of the 19th century - and became common place by mid
century.  Sociologists say that the development of anesthetics at this
time led to the anti-slavery movements and anti-vivisectionists
movements of the 1850s - and to the Civil War in the 1860s.  This
weird connection, between slavery being common place and anesthetics
non-existant in 1800, but slavery being universally reviled and
anesthetics being common place in 1900 - is easily seen as a deep
psychological response to physical suffering being optional.

Many expect that advances in medical science that allow death to be
optional will bring about similar profound changes in the way we see
violence death and war.  In short, another dark stain on our psyche
will be removed by this particular advance.

Along with improvements in medicine and the productive and economic
arts, improvements in propulsion - namely MEMs based laser powered
rocket arrays - the provide propulsive skins of incredible capacity
and capability - that will transform our relationship to the cosmos
and free us of Earth's surface.

http://pdf.aiaa.org/preview/CDReadyMJPC2005_1177/PV2005_3650.pdf>  ~ BG

On Dec 22 2008, 8:34 am, william.m...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

Mök Energy Innovations Increasing Solar Energy Efficiency

1.      Panel Design to Maximize Energy Capture
a.      Concentrators
i.      All concentrating photovoltaic  (CPV) systems seek to reduce costs
by focusing sunlight to a small point and devising a PV device to work
with that small intense point of sunlight efficiently.  In this way
costly PV material is used more efficiently and PV costs are reduced
as a consequence.   The Mök system operates at 1,100x solar intensity
dramatically reducing the cost of PV materials. This method of
operation introduces a number of challenges adding to balance of
system costs.  All these challenges have been efficiently addressed
including the following factors;
1.      Concentrator benefits – low PV cost - the high efficiency multi-
junction PV materials we use are 38% efficient and cost $11,000 per
square meter. By concentrating sunlight 1,100x we only use $10 of
material per square meter.  By generating 380 watts per square meter
our PV costs are less than $0.03 per peak watt.
2.      Concentrator Costs – mirrors, glass lenses, fresnel lenses and
holograms all cost in excess of $100 per square meter.  While
contributing only $0.26 per watt, this cost is still higher than we’d
like to pay.  For this reason we use precision hot press molded PET
films that have an array of molded lens shapes.  Two or more PET
sheets, each 200 microns thick, are joined together in a fluid bath to
create an extremely low cost liquid filled optical cavity that
efficiently focuses light to high intensity at a cost of  less than $1
per square meter, adding a fraction of a cent to the cost of
generating each watt of electrical output.
3.      Thermal management – at 1,100x solar intensity energy arrives at
the PV cell at a rate of 110 watts per square centimeter.  This rate
of energy influx if far too high to be cooled conventionally.  There
are a number of innovations, that are used to manage heat in the Mök
system and do so at very low added cost per watt.;
a.      Spectral Cooling – as taught in one of my patents on this subject,
using dichroic mirrors on the face of the PV cells to create an
optical band-pass filter, allows only effective light to strike the PV
material, limiting heating of the material.  Added cost is nil for the
giant-bi-refingent optical (GBO) films we use.
b.      Limiting Current – by operating six or more junctions efficiently
in series current is reduced, and parasitic i-squared-R heating is
reduced by a factor of 30 or more at no added cost to the system.
c.      Total Immersion in Optical Medium – the fluid filled lens cavities
focus light inside the lens medium.  Locating the PV cells inside
these cavities allow the lens fluid to circulate and efficiently carry
away heat by fluid convection at a rate of 50 watts per square cm per
side at no added cost to the system.
d.      Efficient Loading – continuous operation at the peak power point
for each cell means that over 1/3 the energy arriving at the cell in
the form of optical energy, is efficiently carried away from the cell
by as electrical output, reducing the heat load of the cell at no
added cost to the system..

2.      Eliminate Mechanical Tracking
a.      Entendue’ in optical systems has been compared to entropy in heat
engines.  Just as entropic considerations explain the ultimate
limitations of all heat engines, such as Carnot efficiency, entendue’
provides a powerful argument for similar limitations in all optical
concentrators – namely the clear relation between field of regard and
concentration ratio.  Legendary workers such as Wilson in the 20th
century used in his optical calculations much of the same mathematical
machinery, the continuity of complex spaces, that legends such as
Botzmann used in their work on heat engines in the 19th century.   As
mentioned a critically important finding is the relation between field
of regard and concentration ratio.  This finding seems to require that
highly concentrating systems such as the Mök system possess a
mechanical tracker that accurately maintains orientation toward the
solar disk with an accuracy of a few degrees.  Through a clever
approach to optics, this requirement is met without the use of moving
systems or mechanical trackers and is a central feature of the Mök
system.
b.      The easiest way to see how the Mök system works is to consider
various types of tracking systems – all of which have been built and
studied by Mök;
i.      Bulk mechanical motion – a lens projects the image of the sky onto
an image plane.  A PV cell is located at the center of that image and
the lens is moved mechanically to maintain the image of the solar disk
on that PV cell.
ii.     Internal mechanical motion – the same lens as above projects the
image of the sky as before, but as the sun moves through the sky, the
PV cell is moved inside the lens system within the image plane to
maintain the image of the solar disk on the PV cell
iii.    Compound internal mechanical motion – in this system a secondary
lens is located on the image plane to redirect the solar disk to a
stationary PV cell located beyond the image plane.
iv.     Stationary Compound lens array – in this system an array of
stationary secondary lenses is located on the image plane to redirect
the solar disk to a stationary PV cell located beyond the image plane..
c.      The compound lens array described in item IV above has no moving
parts and is the method Mök uses in its most advanced systems.  This
system is implemented using very low cost synthetic hologons similar
to those used to secure credit cards and consumer goods like CD
cases.  A *** of holographically imprinted plastic material is
placed between the precision molded PET films at an added cost of
fractions of a cent per peak watt.
d.      The wide field of view of the fisheye primary lens combined with
relative insensitivity to orientation allow Mök CPV panels to operate
as a flat panel PV collector regardless of panel orientation or
concentration ratio.  This feature dramatically reduced installation
and maintenance costs.
e.      It is easy to see that a casual analysis might conclude the system
described appears to exceed entendue limits.  A careful analysis
reveals it does not!  By merely observing that the primary lens is
reused thousands of times by each of the secondary lenses in the array
– and that each pair constitutes a separate system each with its own
field of regard, overlapping other pair’s field of regard.  Another
important point is that each system is discontinuous with all others
while following continuity limits itself.
f.      No other CPV system uses this approach, and this is subject of
current patent activity.
3.      Minimize Solar Cell Size
a.      Our solar panels consist therefore of
i.      A top *** of precision molded PET film 200 microns thick
ii.     A ‘redirector cover *** of PET film 25 microns thick.
iii.    A  holographically molded *** of PET 25 microns thick with 5
micron surface deformations produced by a heated nickel form to
implement a holographically formed redirector lens array.
iv.     The redirector cover *** and holographically molded *** are
bound together creating 5 micron thick voids where joined creating a
permanent holographic lens array.
v.      A bottom *** of precision molded PET film 200 microns thick to
complete the liquid filled optical cavity.
vi.     A base top *** of molded ABS plastic
vii.    A base bottom *** of molded ABS plastic
1.      The base bottom *** has copper foil impressed upon it to
implement a power capture circuit.
2.      An array of PV cells  each 750 microns square are cleaved from a
300 mm wafer and joined to the foil pattern already described.
viii.   The base bottom *** is joined to the base top *** to create
an optical die array that is electrically insulated, but has a window
to expose the PV cell.
ix.     The optical die array is molded to form ‘fingers’ that hold each
PV cell at the focal point within each lens in the lens array forming
the base assembly.
x.      The base assembly is joined to the bottom *** described above.
xi.     The bottom ***,, holographic lens array, and top *** are all
joined in a fluid bath to create a finished lens array joined by
ultrasonic welding.
b.      Each PV cell consists of a germanium over silicon base layer that
operates at 1,600 nm.  To that is added through chemical vapor
deposition

...

read more »- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

.