# Capacitor to store lightning?

Status
Not open for further replies.
The whole thing is scaled down. The biggest capacitor I have, in terms of voltage ratings, is 1 KV.

Don't turn curiosity into jealousy.

Benny, a voltage divider is not a patentable idea. You need some intelligent power management system, that measures voltage and diverts current in a new way,... and I don't think you have that. Circuits for switched power supplies are well documented, what you do with the output is not patentable.

Calling volts energy was not too stupid - could have even been typing error.

What reflected your extreme ignorance was the idea that by your circuit stepping up the voltage by a thousand times you could have large offices disconnect from the electric grid. That violates one of the most well known and basic laws of physics - "conseravtion of energy" That was no "typo." - Just extreme ignorance.

As far as your more recent claims, on the characteristic of electrical circuits I have had to correct you more than half a dozen times. You only understand a DC circuit, think lightning is DC as the direction of current flow does not reverse, etc. Thus with no understanding of AC you make many false statements about lightning in circuits.

I have several times asked you to tell even one correct statement about AC (of lighting) in circuits you have made. None told yet.

SUMMARY: More than 6 false statements and zero correct statements about lighting in circuits have been made by still very ignorant BennyF. For example, your thinking only components called "inductors" have inductance, when even straight wires do.

Where do I begin?

Let me start with this. I haven't mentioned AC for two reasons. It's not present in lightning and it's not going to be a source of the voltage that charges the cap in my patent application.

I was taught AC in my school, but it's not found in nature. It's not present in lightning, there's no sine-wave form of electricity present in the human body, it's not found in electric eels, and it's not present anywhere else. The voltage level that is generated by us, by any of the animals, or by any natural phenomena can rise and fall, but not repetitively and regularly over a long time. I could make the case that it was invented by Nicolai Tesla.

My focus here has been on DC. I have limited my discussion to it mostly because this thread started with the question of whether a capacitor could be charged using "lightning". If you'll remember, I corrected the terminology of the original poster myself in this matter. Lightning includes several visible and invisible forms of radiation along with the electrical energy that Mr. Franklin found two and a half centuries ago., so the question was badly worded to begin with, and I've been attempting to rephrase it and answer it at the same time.

Please excuse me for not being as well-educated as you are, but I do have some education myself, I do have a reason to use it (my patent application), and I do have a few ideas that I happen to think are worth discussing.

Benny

Benny, a voltage divider is not a patentable idea.

You need some intelligent power management system, that measures voltage and diverts current in a new way,... and I don't think you have that.

But you don't know for sure, do you, because I haven't disclosed my patent circuitry. Can you figure out why I haven't?

Circuits for switched power supplies are well documented, what you do with the output is not patentable.
Thanks. I'll remember that.

Benny

Where do I begin?

Let me start with this. I haven't mentioned AC for two reasons. It's not present in lightning and it's not going to be a source of the voltage that charges the cap in my patent application.... Benny
That is more of your ignorance on display. ANY short duration pulse is AC - is made of the many AC frequencies that can be calculated by Fourier analysis. Being AC it will very easily pass thru a capacitor.

"But I do have some education myself."

Prove it.

I can't believe it! You've already forgotten!

This board is about circuits, not certificates.

... Any voltage that exceeds the rating of those smaller caps will be grounded. The grounding method is what I'm trying to patent, so I won't disclose it, ...
Benny, capacitors and other component, even complete integrated circuit chips, are commonly protected from over voltage by parallel connected thyristors.

Initially (circa 1950) they were just diodes connect “backwards” so as to not conduct until they internally “broke down” at a relatively well defined reverse voltage value. As I recall you could buy them before 1960 with reverse break down voltages of up to 1KV. (You could, for example, connect five in series to get protection from voltage going over 5KV.) They were solid state devices that once they did break down, became very good conductors so little heat was produced in them as the high voltage was shorted to ground. I.e. they did not easily “burn out” or be destroyed after one use.

Now they are also available with a control that allows them to be “broken down” into conduction mode at whatever voltage you want. This control circuit, if a physical connection, may be damged if high voltage is passing thru the thyristor, so for control at many KVs, optical triggering into the reverse conduction mode is now available. Here is short quote from article on that:

“… Because of the high-voltage environment of thyristors in HVDC applications rated up to 500 kV it is necessary to electrically separate the trigger unit at ground potential from the thyristor at high-voltage potential. The trigger command for the thyristor is transmitted as a light pulse via a fiber-optic cable, even if Electrically Triggered Thyristors (ETTs) are used. Therefore, the possibility of triggering the thyristor directly with the help of a light pulse was considered early. …” From: http://www.igbt.cn/admin/productfile/HIGH-VOLTAGE THYRISTORS.pdf

You are probably just too ignorant of common HV protection practice to realize the problem was very cheaply solved several decades ago by the design of some solid state devices.

BTW, now days it is hard to buy a connector strip of multiple outlets for 110VAC plugs that does not have an "on/off" switch, a little red light telling you the strip is with power, AND internal over voltage protection from High-Voltage such as a lightning strike hitting the power line. Your computer has this internally also but you should always connect your computer to one of these connector strips and not directly to the wall socket for extra protection. Even better is to run it from an external "uninteruptable power supply" which has some energy storage as well as over voltage protection, but they typically cost a few hundred dollars - I don't use one but would never connect my computer directly to the wall AC outlet.

Last edited by a moderator:
ANY short duration pulse is AC - is made of the many AC frequencies that can be calculated by Fourier analysis.

Billy, the above sentence has two verbs. Please clarify it

Last edited:
"But I do have some education myself."

I can't believe it! You've already forgotten!

This board is about circuits, not certificates.

Quit dodging and show us your qualifications.

Benny, capacitors and other component, even complete integrated circuit chips, are commonly protected from over voltage by parallel connected thyristors.

I'm not trying to patent a parallel connected thyristor.

You are probably just too ignorant of common HV protection practice to realize the problem was very cheaply solved several decades ago by the design of some solid state devices.

Even if the problem was "solved", for purposes of reducing the electrical damage and the risk of fire (the primary purpose of the NEC), I happen to believe that another method of charging a capacitor still exists, one that has not been patented yet, according to my study of the US Patent Office's Class 320, Subclass 166. That patent is my number one goal, even more important to me than any argument I could possibly "win" on this board.

Benny

Last edited:

Quit dodging and show us your qualifications.

I must have missed your qualification to be the board monitor. Could you state it again, for our benefit?

Billy, the above sentence has two verbs. Please clarify it
It is completely clear and correct version of:

ANY short duration pulse is AC, which is made of the many AC frequencies that can be calculated by Fourier analysis.

I.e., as is common practice, I used a dash instead of the "which."

Note there are still two verbs in the sentence - that too is very common.

I must have missed your qualification to be the board monitor. Could you state it again, for our benefit?

In Post #303

You said

Someone who had studied electricity would use a more precise term than "blocked" current, which is YOUR term, not mine.

I then proved you wrong, and that I had studied Electricity and Electronics, and showed you my qualification, as did Mac.

I doubt your education, so it would simply be polite to return the courtesy of showing us your alleged qualification.

I'm not trying to patent a parallel connected thyristor....
That is good but in addition to at most collecting energy (if any) with value of only 0.000,001 of the capital amortization cost (of your many capacitors and "attraction tower.") your circuit protecting the capacitors from over charge must cost only a small fraction of dollar as its protection function, which you have often mentioned, must economically compete with very-cheap mass-produced commonly-available, solid state devices.

SUMMARY: Because of your extreme ignorance of AC circuits, even the fact that lightning is AC in its interaction with circuits, your whole idea is economically insane. No one will pay you one cent for a more costly way to charge and protect capacitors from over charge.

Last edited by a moderator:
I must have missed your qualification to be the board monitor.

In that post, you mentioned your "intelligence", but certificates are not what we're discussing. Circuits are.

II then proved you wrong, and that I had studied Electricity and Electronics, and showed you my qualification, as did Mac.

I doubt your education, so it would simply be polite to return the courtesy of showing us your alleged qualification.

Focus on circuits, not certificates, or I'll put you in limbo again.

Last edited:
That is good but in addition to at most collecting energy (if any) with value of only 0.000,001 of the capital amortization cost (of your many capacitors and "attraction tower.") your circuit protecting the capacitors from over charge must cost only a small fraction of dollar as its protection function, which you have often mentioned, must economically compete with very-cheap mass-produced commonly-available, solid state devices.

When a patent examiner looks at someone's application, he doesn't measure its' economic value, he decides whether the claims that are made in the application are scientifically sound. This is true for anyone who wishes to patent a carpenter's tool, an electric circuit, a kitchen appliance, or even a new DNA sequence. Patent laws and regulations require at least one claim per application. The reason is that any inventor must be able to say what his invention is intended to do.

SUMMARY: Because of your extreme ignorance of AC circuits, even the fact that lightning is AC in its interaction with circuits, your whole idea is economically insane. No one will pay you one cent for a more costly way to charge and protect capacitors from over charge.

So what? He'll file, get rejected, and perhaps learn something in the process. Nothing wrong with that.

When a patent examiner looks at someone's application, he doesn't measure its' economic value, he decides whether the claims that are made in the application are scientifically sound. This is true for anyone who wishes to patent a carpenter's tool, an electric circuit, a kitchen appliance, or even a new DNA sequence. Patent laws and regulations require at least one claim per application. The reason is that any inventor must be able to say what his invention is intended to do.
And the point in getting /paying for / a worthless patent is?

Because you make so many false statements reflecting your ignorance, I think you will be lucky if your application even gets to an examiner. Most likely the secretary who first opens it to determine which examination group it should be forwarded to, will just "circular file it." - put it in the round trash can as she does with many applications, making silly or impossible claims or displaying total ignorance of the subject.

You may not know it but one main purpose of the patent office it to teach new arts. - Grant an exclusive period of their commercial exploitation for public disclosure of the art instead of secrete use of it. You mainly teach falsehoods so circular filing of your application is the correct action.

Last edited by a moderator:
Let me start with this. I haven't mentioned AC for two reasons. It's not present in lightning and it's not going to be a source of the voltage that charges the cap in my patent application.

Lightning is a summation of many different AC sinx/x impulses, as all impulses are. It's effectively an AC waveform with (in most cases) a DC bias.

I was taught AC in my school, but it's not found in nature.

Are you kidding? Solar storms induce AC current in the ground. We generate AC current - our potentials are both positive and negative, and they change regularly. Here's a picture of an EKG:

Note how the signal goes positive and negative as the muscles in our hearts fire (depolarize) and repolarize. This is amazingly regular in most people.

It's not present in lightning, there's no sine-wave form of electricity present in the human body, it's not found in electric eels, and it's not present anywhere else.

Here's the waveform from the discharge of an African electric eel:

Note how it goes up _and_ down! Which, of course, is AC (alternating current.)

The voltage level that is generated by us, by any of the animals, or by any natural phenomena can rise and fall, but not repetitively and regularly over a long time.

And that's AC. AC is alternating current. When a current reverses polarity it's AC. When it does not it's DC. A DC component of a signal is a constant offset; an AC component of a signal is, as the name implies, alternating.

Please excuse me for not being as well-educated as you are, but I do have some education myself, I do have a reason to use it (my patent application), and I do have a few ideas that I happen to think are worth discussing.

And yet you refuse to discuss them while bringing up your patent over and over. Odd.

Status
Not open for further replies.