Galvanic cell experiment by Dutchsinse

solrey

solrey

Senior Member
When two dissimilar metals are separated by an electrolyte a voltage potential is produced. This is how batteries work. We learned this somewhere around grades 4 through 6, we made batteries with lemons and potatoes. An 11 year old boy named Derek did well in science fairs with a well organized experiment testing different configurations of galvanic cells. His 14 year old sister helps him stay organized.

The Effect of Metal Type on the Voltage of a Galvanic Cell

Enter dutchsinse...

External Quote:
POWER PRINTED ON PAPER! Voltage from paper thin, non-moving DC GENERATOR!
External Quote:


DC power generation using non-moving, non-toxic, and even EDIBLE materials.




External Quote:
Seeking a crowdsource for funding the development of this power source into something useable for the world.
This is just sad... and the comments are worse.
 
Strawman said:
Is dutch trolling his viewers?
Click to expand...

dunno, he seems serious enough...

External Quote:
Some people coming here saying I've "invented the battery" as if to say this exists in current electronics or something.

LOL... but no lol.. I get what you're saying, and I can see how people make this mistake.... but these people are misunderstanding what they're seeing ( I think / hope).

This is not a battery. There is no "stored charge". The charge coming "out" is coming out of the elements, which themselves are pulling THEIR charge from the sea of energy in the yet unknown quantum universe.

These elements get their charge, THEIR flow of energy comes from the "universe"... we are only accessing the shared electrons which pass between elements when they are near each other.

It does not appear to matter which elements you use, as long as they are arranged in order of electronegativity, to induce a "flow" coming "out" from the generator, which is generating DC voltage (and amperage) via brute force valence electron "sharing".

While they are "sharing" electrons, we pick some up, and use them as DC current -- and the elements somehow yet unknown pull their own electrons from the universe to remain stable.

To demonstrate this, that it is NOT a battery of any kind, I would like to get 4 very thin sheets of metal, arrange them in proper order, press them using a metal press, and test the voltage on the wafer of metal. It SHOULD produce at least the same or greater voltage (and greater amperes) based upon the thickness of the metal, the consistency of the press, the materials used, and size of the unit.

You should be able to press small sheets of metal like Copper, Nickel, Zinc, and Aluminum together ( in layers in that order of EN ... Copper 1.9 - Nickel 1.8 - Zinc 1.6 - Aluminum 1.5 to also get DC voltage.. straight from metal ! Not to be confused with a Nickel zinc battery, this can be done on a piece of paper with paints and non-toxic substances.

No acids, no chemical reactions involved. Ideally one would use Copper , Carbon , Calcium, and Potassium. All natural.

Finally, it is thermal reactive, it increases voltage when warm.. like an excited metal spreads heat via moving electrons.. if you warm up this generator cell, it produces more voltage. It does not require thermal reaction to produce voltage though. :)
Does he think those vitamins are pure elemental versions of those metals? Did he read the labels? For example, the Zinc is actually in the form of zinc gluconate, a salt of gluconic acid.

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

Other ingredients are: Vegetable Cellulose, Dicalcium Phosphate, Silica, Vegetable Magnesium Stearate, Vegetable Stearic Acid

http://images.vitaminimages.com/cdn/sd/pdf/L002060-NB.PDF

Apparently he does not realize that some of those ingredients could act as an electrolyte when mixed with water? Does he not understand that a battery produces electricity due to a chemical reaction, essentially controlled corrosion, such that a lead-acid battery with fresh electrodes will produce electricity as soon as the electrolyte is added?

Yes dutch, you made a battery, a galvanic cell, and heat is a catalyst for chemical reactions thus the higher voltage.
 
Last edited:
At least he's beginning to science. Too bad the Egyptians figured all this out 3 or 4 thousand years ago.. but at least he's learning the basics of science.

acc5b7e149052e0894befe8d2df0c28f.png
 
Spectrar Ghost said:
"A 3D printer connected to those elements could print batteries."
Click to expand...
Depends how soon 3d printers that work with metal instead of plastic are available. Probably a long way from the consumer market just for safety reasons of giving people a device that melts metal, but commercial ones I've read are in development.


Pet peeve: People seem to conflate "3d printed" with "free." A typical consumer model 3d printer is capable of producing the equivalent to cheap plastic crap from the checkout line of the grocery store, but at much higher cost. That filament "ink" is not cheap. A higher quality printer can produce quite high quality products, including surgical quality tools and industrial components, but at even higher cost.

Anything you need more than a few of would be cheaper made through more traditional means. But with those methods making just a few of something is prohibitively expensive because of initial costs, which is why 3d printers are so useful for custom items but so bad for mass production.
 
Hevach said:
Depends how soon 3d printers that work with metal instead of plastic are available. Probably a long way from the consumer market just for safety reasons of giving people a device that melts metal, but commercial ones I've read are in development.
Click to expand...

Yes.. the closest thing we have now are CNC machines.. they're great for quasi 2D objects.. like panels and some machined parts, but the heat and torques involved for trying to carve something out of a block of aluminum are huge.

The beauty of 3D printing is that its done in layers.. one on top of the other.. not sure you can layer metals like that and it work. Will be sweet to see how its done.
 
solrey said:
This is just sad... and the comments are worse.
Click to expand...
I don't so much mind the experiment, or even that he thinks he's made a new discovery, I doff my hat to anyone who takes time out to improve themselves and learn some science. Can't wait until he "discovers" the zinc-air battery :)

I even think the crowd funding is because he genuinely thinks he's discovered something new.

The comments though..... time was when pretty much any 10 year old would not only be able to identify his "invention" for what it was, they would have already done the experiment at school. All but a handful of commenters seem to be as awe-struck as primitives seeing their first hand mirror.

Something has gone badly wrong somewhere.

Ray Von
 
Ray Von Geezer said:
I don't so much mind the experiment, or even that he thinks he's made a new discovery, I doff my hat to anyone who takes time out to improve themselves and learn some science. Can't wait until he "discovers" the zinc-air battery :)

I even think the crowd funding is because he genuinely thinks he's discovered something new.

The comments though..... time was when pretty much any 10 year old would not only be able to identify his "invention" for what it was, they would have already done the experiment at school. All but a handful of commenters seem to be as awe-struck as primitives seeing their first hand mirror.

Something has gone badly wrong somewhere.

Ray Von
Click to expand...


Shouldnt surprise you too much Ray.. just look at what passes for entertainment. Let's also not forget that while education is a good platform to run on, nobody really fixes anything. For example, I didnt do a lot of these experiments in school because by the time I was old enough to do them, a lot of the funding had been cut. Hell I didnt get to really dig into chemistry until I was in 11th Grade because there wasnt enough money for the chemicals and safety gear.. and even THEN, we were in groups of 5 to 10 with one person actually doing the experiment while everyone else stood around and watched. On the other hand though, the sports budgets were growing by leaps and bounds. Why? because sports brought in money.. Chemistry, Biology, Math, Arts and Music COST money.
 
One of his comments in the thread:



External Quote:

Let them know its not coming from nothing.. the atoms which make up the elements are always pulling THEIR electrons (to stay stable) from the background universe charge which makes up the electrons from the "sea of energy" . Therefore the power is coming from the Universe, and is translated to us via an electron exchange which happens between certain materials when placed next to one another so the electrons can exchange between surfaces of said elements.

Is he high?

How else could making the equivalent of a 5th grade potato clock be so earth shattering?

Or is he cynically acting in the knowledge that his followers will believe that he is on to something special here and send him more money?
 
Ray Von Geezer said:
The comments though..... time was when pretty much any 10 year old would not only be able to identify his "invention" for what it was, they would have already done the experiment at school. All but a handful of commenters seem to be as awe-struck as primitives seeing their first hand mirror.
Click to expand...

Yeah, well I'm pretty sure that I knew what a cirrus cloud was by the time I was 10 as well.
 
jasonmushersee ...I've been talking to electrical engineers for years about this and they always say you can't get energy from nothing.



dutchsinse--Let them know its not coming from nothing.. the atoms which make up the elements are always pulling THEIR electrons (to stay stable) from the background universe charge which makes up the electrons from the "sea of energy" . Therefore the power is coming from the Universe...


**************************************************************

See, this is why we can't have nice science:
Idiot "electrical engineers" don't even know about this "universe" dealie...
and that harnessing it's background energy is a snap...
 
scombrid said:
Is he high?

How else could making the equivalent of a 5th grade potato clock be so earth shattering?

Or is he cynically acting in the knowledge that his followers will believe that he is on to something special here and send him more money?
Click to expand...
"Doing science" is not necessarily the same thing as "understanding science." Tons of free energy people on youtube do stuff like water cracking and heat engines and think they've bypassed the laws of thermodynamics in some way. They'll use a motor to spin a generator and plug the generator into the same battery and it'll run much longer than just the motor, and then they'll use that as proof that they're getting close to that magic combination that will run forever.

Heck, hasn't Dutch been one of the water and soil testers?

Svartbjørn said:
The beauty of 3D printing is that its done in layers.. one on top of the other.. not sure you can layer metals like that and it work. Will be sweet to see how its done.
Click to expand...
The companies claiming to be working on it aren't very forthcoming that I can find, but the theories I've read are layered welds (which would be very slow and use an incredible amount of electricity. Probably also require metal work afterwards to clean it up) and soft metals with melting points comparable to high-quality 3d printer plastic (which probably means very brittle and heat sensitive products that might not actually be more useful than a plastic one).
 
Last edited:
He's taking his toys and going home...

https://fundrazr.com/campaigns/axWW4/ab/5meHf

External Quote:
Many thanks to those who gave... but 75 dollars after being up 2 days... not much to work with.

Apparently no one cares besides just a few people. Thus, I will be using the 75 dollars sent to purchase a new voltmeter, so I can do one more test using 2 meters side by side.

Then, I'm throwing it all away, and going back to cutting down trees for a living.
Careful with that axe, Eugene!


 
Oooh. If someone just gave me $75 I'd spend it all on button cells, stack them together in a huge pile and harness the sea of energy in the unknown quantum universe. Or just get a couple of pizzas and a box of Stella. Whatevs.

Ray Von
 
solrey said:
He's taking his toys and going home...

https://fundrazr.com/campaigns/axWW4/ab/5meHf

External Quote:
Many thanks to those who gave... but 75 dollars after being up 2 days... not much to work with.

Apparently no one cares besides just a few people. Thus, I will be using the 75 dollars sent to purchase a new voltmeter, so I can do one more test using 2 meters side by side.

Then, I'm throwing it all away, and going back to cutting down trees for a living.
Click to expand...
:( Hey. i want a voltmeter too. guys, send me some money would ya?
 


External Quote:


This is not a battery. There is no "stored charge". The charge coming "out" is coming out of the elements, which themselves are pulling THEIR charge from the sea of energy in the yet unknown quantum universe.

These elements get their charge, THEIR flow of energy comes from the "universe"... we are only accessing the shared electrons which pass between elements when they are near each other.
So three weeks ago Dutchsinse was insisting that it was not a battery that he "invented".

He went as far as to call his "invention":

External Quote:
POWER PRINTED ON PAPER! Voltage from paper thin, non-moving DC GENERATOR!
Now he insists that he beat Stanford to the punch in the invention of an aluminum ion battery and that Stanford copied him.

https://www.facebook.com/DutchsinseOfficial/posts/915494191836339

https://www.facebook.com/DutchsinseOfficial/posts/915462258506199

External Quote:

ALERT!

Stanford has just "invented" the battery that I showed you how to make 3 weeks ago.
Three weeks ago Dutchsinse insisted that it wasn't a battery in response to critics telling him that it was a battery.

External Quote:
Made out of aluminum, and graphite.

SAME ITEMS I SHOWED IN THE VIDEO !!!!! Aluminum and graphite smile emoticon

Apparently someone at stanford is watching my videos!!! awesome!

Their video from April 6th (yesterday):


http://www.engadget.com/…/stanfords-battery-charges-in-one…/

_____

Here is my video from 3 weeks ago.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehralTmhk40
1. He has deleted this post and subsequent comments from his facebook feed. Why?

2. Is it a battery or not Dutch? The Standford scientists are calling it a battery, one that can be charged very quickly.

3. Did Dutch really beat them to the punch? Seems that they submitted their manuscript to the Journal Nature in March 2014 and the current round of press releases accompanies the official publication of the paper in that journal.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature14340.html

External Quote:

An ultrafast rechargeable aluminium-ion battery
Nature
(2015)
doi:10.1038/nature14340
Received
12 March 2014
Accepted
06 February 2015
Published online
06 April 2015
 
Last edited:
scombrid said:
So three weeks ago Dutchsinse was insisting that it was not a battery that he "invented".
Click to expand...

Ya, Dutch claims he has been cheated by Stanford. He says his research pre-dates Stanford's YouTube Video and therefore he deserves credit for the idea.

dutch-facebook.png


What Dutch doesn't realize is that members of the Stanford team have been researching this Aluminum battery for years. The leader of the team, Hongjie Dai, published a progress report dated Nov, 2014.

External Quote:
High-capacity NiAlCo Layered Double Hydroxide Cathode for Ultrafast NiZn Battery
Hongjie Dai group, Department of Chemistry, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA

http://gcep.stanford.edu/pdfs/techreports2014/6.2_Dai_Sponsor_and_Public_Version.pdf
Here's a paper submitted Jan 26, 2014. Hongjie Dai was one of the researchers.

External Quote:
Ultrafast high-capacity NiZn battery with NiAlCo-layered double hydroxide

http://pubs.rsc.org/en/Content/ArticleLanding/2014/EE/c4ee00317a#!divAbstract
I would like to know the advantages that Dutch's vitamin paste copper aluminum sandwich battery has over Stanford's synthesized NiAlCo-layered double hydroxide (LDH) nanoplates battery.
 
Last edited:
According to a paper published in 2002, Aluminum as anode for energy storage and conversion: a review, an aluminum anode and carbon cathode were proposed as early as 1893 and aluminum has been considered as a battery electrode since the 1850's.

External Quote:
Aluminum has been considered as a battery electrode since 1850s when Hulot described a cell with zinc (mercury) as anode, aluminum as cathode and dilute H2SO4 as electrolyte. Aluminum as anode was first used in the Buff cell in 1857. In 1893, an amalgamated aluminum–zinc alloy was proposed for use as anode in a cell with carbon cathode.
Dutch probably doesn't want to know that his batteries have a low power density and short life-span due to that layer of corrosion that inevitably forms on the surface of aluminum and copper... and that he's only about 160 years too late. :(

His idea is unique though, I'll bet nobody else thought of using crushed vitamin paste as an electrolyte...:rolleyes:
 
It seems every few years, news of some advancement in battery technology makes a big splash in the headlines. Despite some hype, the improvements in the technology are incremental, or they look promising but never pan out. Stanford's Al ion battery seems to be another case. It sounds great, looks promising but they still have many issues to fix before getting it to market.

Dutchsinse should not dispair, he has plenty of time to improve the energy density of his crushed vitamin paste battery.
 
The sad part is that it looks like he really though about all that by himself. I genuinely believe that he thinks that he was the first person to think about that.

It happens to all of us rather frequently. How many times did you have a great idea and started researching it only to see that someone else already "invented" that?

But he is so into the Conspiracy Mindset that the only logical conclusion for him is that someone stole his idea. He denies all evidence that contradicts that. That's usually what happens for all truthers: deny, deny, deny.
 
Dutchsinse is still trying to claim that Stanford ripped off his idea:

https://www.facebook.com/DutchsinseOfficial/posts/921994267852998

His claim hinges on his belief that Stanford submitted their work to the journal Nature just hours before his video was released.

External Quote:
To prove their complicity, they claim they filed their "invention" with the Journal of Nature and science a few HOURS before my video went public..... grin emoticon OMG WTH?!

So.. someone working at Journal of Nature is in cahoots with Stanford.... Someone at Stanford saw my video , did their own test, then quickly contacted Nature to work out their submission time to be slightly before my VIDEO
The fact is, the paper was submitted to Nature in March 2014 and took a year to go through peer review and editing. I do not understand how he is making such an obvious mistake.


External Quote:

I've now been officially screwed out of BILLIONS of dollars by a well known institution.


Instead of giving credit -- Stanford University RIPPED the paper thin Aluminum Graphite Carbon battery idea and claimed it as their own.

1. They did the work over several years and submitted the paper for peer review a full year before Dutch put out his video.

2. He claimed in his video that his device was not a battery and made a point to ridicule anyone that suggested that he had built a battery.


Here is again the citation from Nature:

External Quote:

An ultrafast rechargeable aluminium-ion battery
Nature
(2015)
doi:10.1038/nature14340
Received
12 March 2014
Accepted
06 February 2015
Published online
06 April 2015
Click to expand...
 
Trigger Hippie said:
Do you know if he's thinking of applying for a patent?
Click to expand...
You would think one would do that before posting a video to YouTube. o_O

scombrid said:
Dutchsinse is still trying to claim that Stanford ripped off his idea:

https://www.facebook.com/DutchsinseOfficial/posts/921994267852998

His claim hinges on his belief that Stanford submitted their work to the journal Nature just hours before his video was released.

External Quote:
To prove their complicity, they claim they filed their "invention" with the Journal of Nature and science a few HOURS before my video went public..... grin emoticon OMG WTH?!

So.. someone working at Journal of Nature is in cahoots with Stanford.... Someone at Stanford saw my video , did their own test, then quickly contacted Nature to work out their submission time to be slightly before my VIDEO
The fact is, the paper was submitted to Nature in March 2014 and took a year to go through peer review and editing. I do not understand how he is making such an obvious mistake.


External Quote:

I've now been officially screwed out of BILLIONS of dollars by a well known institution.


Instead of giving credit -- Stanford University RIPPED the paper thin Aluminum Graphite Carbon battery idea and claimed it as their own.

1. They did the work over several years and submitted the paper for peer review a full year before Dutch put out his video.

2. He claimed in his video that his device was not a battery and made a point to ridicule anyone that suggested that he had built a battery.


Here is again the citation from Nature:
Click to expand...
Did he talk/write about this before posting his video? Or did Stanford read his mind?
 
The key word in the Stanford's invention is "Rechargeable". Rechargeable battery, or Secondary cell, is very different from the Dutchsinse's "invention" of simple Galvanic, or Primary cell.
External Quote:
Batteries are classified into primary and secondary forms.
  • Primary batteries irreversibly transform chemical energy to electrical energy. When the supply of reactants is exhausted, energy cannot be readily restored to the battery.[19]
  • Secondary batteries can be recharged; that is, they can have their chemical reactions reversed by supplying electrical energy to the cell, approximately restoring their original composition.[20]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_(electricity)#Categories_and_types_of_batteries
 
Now he's claiming that his not-so-unique-or-new-idea of carbon as an electrode is being ripped off to make a "solar panel". Or as he calls it "electronegativity using carbon". o_O

dutchpost1.png



Thing is, as far as I can tell... there is no carbon in their storage cell. It consists of a vanadium electrolyte (vanadium and sulfuric acid), a platinum mesh electrode and a titanium dioxide/tungsten trioxide electrode. I don't know where he gets the idea that carbon is involved, unless he thinks that the platinum mesh electrode in the over-simplified diagram is carbon because it's colored a dark grey. Hmmm, wonder why he crops the labels off along the bottom of the diagram in his fb post. And didn't his idea involve stacking materials in order from low to high electronegativity, which would allegedly pull electrons from the aether or something to that effect?

VRB hybrid.gif


External Quote:
In this paper, a WO3/TiO2 hybrid photoelectrode was coupled with our newly developed all-vanadium photoelectrochemical cell (PEC) with the aim of implementing photoelectrochemical solar energy conversion and storage.
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/cs502024k

The paper was received by the publisher on Dec. 16, 2014... dutch uploaded his vid on Mar. 13, 2015.

As has been established, carbon has been used as an electrode for over 100 years and vanadium redox batteries that utilize carbon have been under development since at least 1986.

http://www.osti.gov/scitech/biblio/5286742

http://www.researchgate.net/profile...ic_systems/links/54128de00cf2788c4b355f52.pdf

http://www.kigeit.org.pl/FTP/PRCIP/Literatura/081_Vanadium_Redox_Battieries.pdf

Alas, there is hope. He promises to stop sharing his "inventions" because he thinks teams of scientists are ripping ideas off of youtube... ideas that have been under development for decades before youtube even existed. Dude is so way, way far behind the curve it isn't even funny.

dutchwhine.png
 
Last edited:
Soulfly said:
The fact is, the paper was submitted to Nature in March 2014 and took a year to go through peer review and editing. I do not understand how he is making such an obvious mistake.
Click to expand...

I suspect nothing more than wishful thinking (and/or the desire to keep his "followers" believing in him)



Trailblazer said:
He seems to think you could use the microwave energy from your wifi router to power.... erm, other stuff in your house. Including your wifi router, presumably...
Click to expand...

And, once more, the confirmation of this huge news is... (wait for it...):

Just...

around...

the...

(endless) corner...



The hardest part....jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

NorCal Dave
Meta Materials From UFOs
2 3 4
Replies
134
Views
47K
Gary C
Gary C
John J.
Is "Improved Instrumental Techniques...", Nolan, Vallee, Jiang, Lemke 2022 a useful paper?
2 3 4
Replies
129
Views
29K
Z.W. Wolf
Z.W. Wolf

Latest posts

Trending content

Back
Top