Comments for write.less

Comment on 13-Year-Old finds Fibonacci Solar Power Breakthrough, or: Media are so in love with the good story they shut down their brains by JeraldKane

JeraldKane — Sun, 22 Jul 2012 13:01:10 +0000

Its no breakthough. Just more of media frenziness.

Comment on riding the re:bike by peter

peter — Sat, 19 Nov 2011 20:52:30 +0000

reads like it is a cool thing .
decided, to do similar .
…..
link to project wiki is broken
please could someone give me a hint where to find info on NSLU2 with a usb huawei e160 ?

thank you in advance

Comment on Explaining the Fibonacci solar breakthrough (that isn’t one) – UPDATED by sebastian

sebastian — Mon, 05 Sep 2011 08:13:54 +0000

Mitch, thanks for the comment -

however,

1) ” but there’s no reason to assume power under load doesn’t simply follow voltage” – yes, there is – that is one key point here. power under load does NOT follow voltage.

2) the comparison with stacking in series is wrong – that s not whats being done here.

3) “If under load there would most probably also be more power output proportionally due to this voltage.” – no – see 1)

4) you are absolutely right on the meaningful experiment being: measuring integrated power output over whole days.

thank you!

Comment on Explaining the Fibonacci solar breakthrough (that isn’t one) – UPDATED by Mitch

Mitch — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 14:22:02 +0000

Nice try, but no. Yes it’s better to monitor voltage under load, i.e. power, rather than open circuit voltage, but there’s no reason to assume power under load doesn’t simply follow voltage. In other words, consider the increase in light to be like stacking additional aa batteries in series. The more you stack the higher the open circuit voltage, just like Aidan’s results.
With batteries, though, it’s easy to see that it would work also under load.

Aidan’s curves are wider, i.e. more voltage at the beginning and end of the day. If under load there would most probably also be more power output proportionally due to this voltage.

I think the better experiment is to mount the cells in a curve, such that some are directly facing the sun at the beginning and end of the day. Mid-day they lose in comparison to traditional array. The item of interest is the difference in the integrated total power output (and by above reasoning, also the less direct integrated total voltage output).

My guess is that it is non-linear and that it pays to sacrifice some dawn and dusk power in order to maximize the midday power.

(fyi, I’m EE MIT ’73, now a software engineer & electronics hobbyist)

Comment on Explaining the Fibonacci solar breakthrough (that isn’t one) – UPDATED by INTERVIEW – Nothing is new in Dwyer’s solar device | Esquentadinho

Sun, 28 Aug 2011 23:47:26 +0000

[...] This week we had news which committed mistakes on an american teenager experiment. It’s the Aidan Dwyer’s school project involving Fibonacci sequences to obtain more solar power. According Dwyer, who won the Young Naturalist Award of The American Museum of Natural History, the scheme gets from 20% to 50% more power than conventional flat solar panels. This issue provoked some controversy in the science world due to a media over reacting on Dwyer’s invention. You can see details at this link. [...]

Comment on Explaining the Fibonacci solar breakthrough (that isn’t one) – UPDATED by Fabio Riesemberg

Fabio Riesemberg — Wed, 24 Aug 2011 21:57:41 +0000

Dear Mr. Editor,

I was interested in repeat in my page Fibonacci post from a page called http://www.ciclovivo.com.br when I decided to investigate. Well, I found your post in counterpoint. However I’m a mere jounalist and don’t know physics deeply. So I ask:
- Are there other setups with solar boards out of normal setup which can have superior or equal results than Fibonacci has?
- The second graphic is dated by 2008. Is that when you made this comparision? Is that meas Fibonacci was attempted at that time already, so the “breakthrough” is completely false.
- As I see Fibonacci supposed higher performance is due to a simple solar board positioning, nothing to do with the amount of power achieved in certain period of time. Am I right?
- I’d like to know your name.
- Your domain has “dk”. Are you danish?
- What is your occupation? Are you a physician? Where do you work?

I ask these questions in order to write a good non-tendentious article.

Regards.

Comment on 13-Year-Old finds Fibonacci Solar Power Breakthrough, or: Media are so in love with the good story they shut down their brains by Explaining the Fibonacci solar breakthrough (that isn’t one) « write.less

Wed, 24 Aug 2011 19:45:02 +0000

[...] news in the first place: a solar power breakthrough. Original post here, and my first comment here. Unfortunately, there s no breakthrough – just a chain reaction of one website after the [...]

Comment on Explaining the Fibonacci solar breakthrough (that isn’t one) – UPDATED by 13-Year-Old finds Fibonacci Solar Power Breakthrough, or: Media are so in love with the good story they shut down their brains « write.less

Tue, 23 Aug 2011 13:24:34 +0000

[...] UPDATE: Trying to explain how the misunderstanding/hoax comes about: Explaining the Fibonacci solar breakthrough (that isn’t one) [...]

Comment on OpenWRT on the Ubiquiti Bullet2 by MR b

MR b — Sat, 26 Mar 2011 22:10:54 +0000

yes, buy a 24v poe with a reset switch on it !

Comment on reboot11: action in africa by I nätverkets utkanter: Användarägda nätverk at blay.se

I nätverkets utkanter: Användarägda nätverk at blay.se — Thu, 29 Apr 2010 23:22:08 +0000

[...] höll på Reboot i Köpenhamn i juni och även på Hacknight på forskningsavdelningen den 11 juli (slides här). Det handlar om “user owned network” och står för precis för den hybridiseringen vi [...]