B wrote:EEtom, this is Y_po's original position. It shows he assumed EEStor's solution was a ferroelectric simple dipole system. It is not. That's why he got so mad at me when I told him Penn State said it was not a simple dipole system and that they were interested in other mechanisms that could achieve the energy density in question ala recapping. Y_Po, remember getting so angry about that? Why did you get so angry?
Notice how he assumed permittivity was not measured. It was measured and reported via 3rd party. That's why Y_Po left the site for a couple weeks. He had to reconstitute new bullshit which everyone agrees he achieved.
B quoting Y_Po wrote:It is really pretty simple
In ferroelectrics you have electric dipoles which can be polarized quite easily by external electric field. That is where energy effectively stored.
The problem is amount of dipoles is fixed, once you ramp up external voltage all dipoles get polarized and no more left. Your high-k material effectively became low k-material, end of EEstory :)
Upper limit on polarization cell is a ion charge multiplied by distance ion allowed to travel.
You can do math yourself.
There are two separate problems:
1. voltage breakdown
2. k-problem (dielectric saturation)
They presumably solved first one and completely ignored/was not aware of the second one
The easy way is treat it as a capacitor:
calculate maximum polarization (or surface charge)
Then use it to calculate saturation voltage using permittivity.
After that use standard 1/2*C*V^2
Y_Po calculated max polarization per lattice cell. Does not matter what type of system - for EESU to work this must be 60C/m^2, not the ~1C/m^2 limit found in crystal lattices.
Y_Po "ferrorelectrics" is generic name for materials like CMBT, whether in feroelectrric or paraelectric mode. They have been extensively studies in both modes so don't let Weir's "paraelectric" confuse yoyu. The Y_Po calculation works identically in both modes.
"non-simple dipole systems". You need a woo-woo word I guess.
If this means variants on space charge (bound or unbound) it categorically does not help. I showed this quite recently. Basically the space charge always moved to shield the inside of the material from the external field, so ED is limited by Emax, Pmax on outer edge of material which is calculated as before. I gave a very general proof of this - but it would go over your head.
If it means something else no-one has suggested a viable way to get high lattice polarization, nor is there any evidence anywhere in the literature. (TP here comes nearest with something that require BdV of 3000V/u in BT and asymmetrical behaviour from lattice cells and has zero experimental or simulation evidence. He was pushed to this weird idea, away from space charge, because of my pointing out the inherent difficulties of all space charge models).
As for Y_Po's mental state etc - I leave him to answer that. But I would not stake your EESU belief on ideas about Y_Po mental state if I were you.
If you know any academic (or tech competent non-academic) anywhere who believes your woo-woo give me contact details I will talk to them and they will tell me how you misunderstood what they said.
PS - DW does not count - he's not tech competent. Nor does CN, he has conflict of interests, and anyway has stated himself to be non-competent.
Last edited Sat, 16 Apr 2011, 6:14am
Assumptions: 1) E=1/2CV2
(Only dummies assume this)