Yeah guys, sorry I knew the post was confusing when I was writing it cuz I started talking about our meager but 1 kW+ torque transmission AWE demos, then resumed explaining my continued skepticism regarding Skysails, then went back to talking about torque transmission demos. Bad and lazy lack of editing on my part. Sorry for the confusion.
Yes Santos hates anything torque-related. He has pretty much declared it invalid if not impossible - anything to shoot it down. (No pun intended.) In fact I think it was him who started using the term âtorqueâ - to me, itâs always been about âspinâ, as in âspin a generatorâ - not all that much torque involved, really, although of course every rotor adds more (woo-hoo!) but hey, a rose by any other name is still a rose. Depending on the source, certain people saying your idea sucks is actually a positive sign! 
How about inviting the AKN Team here to answer the questions? They are known and are available.
Everyone is free to post here. If you are thinking about a particular suspended user, this would not be the right place to discuss that.
Please guide me. I should be interested in helping restore a friend.
I think this discussion maybe better taken on reddit or twitter or similar general purpose forums.
If you have specific problems you would like to address, I suggest reading up on history then being specific, and also preferably communicate in private messages to not do our laundry in public⌠[for the sake of the individual users]
Despite their denials, the group you represent, who ran the previous forum, were responsible for deleting many many messages. Their censorship, and their habit of lying, and our protests over it, were an ongoing topic, so significant it strains credulity for them to now deny it. The only âfunnyâ thing about this situation is they had me so upset over their censorship I would wrack my brain wishing they could somehow see how it felt to put your heart and soul into attempted communication about wind energy, only to have some person unable to grasp even the basic of wind energy, just delete all you wrote with some lame-ass excuse based on their ignorance. To this day I do not remember seeing any significant electrical output from anything they have been associated with, which, by this point, is par for the course. So on the one hand I agree with their sudden switch to being against censorship instead of being the censors (despite their ongoing lies) , on the other hand it couldnât have happened to a nicer guy. If they had anything to show anyone, they should build it, run it, and put up a video showing output on metersâŚ
Hello John: donât feel obliged to be the spokesperson of we-know-who.
We are waiting for your own AWE ideas and concepts.
Hi John: I would say Pierre has put forward more of his own, independent ideas, than almost anyone.
Talking of independent ideas. I have been an early fan of AWE and as you well know, I co-founded the first and yet only global AWE Industry Association - AWEIA with free-joining members from all continents.
Serving as president-protem of the association and co-owner/administrator of the earliest AWE forum on YahooGroups did avail me of privileged insider information. IMHO, everyone interested in Climate Change mitigation and Energy Production is a stakeholder in AWE.
While I do not claim technical expertise in AWE being not a core physicist nor an engineer. My role has been more in investor/support functions.
Yet, given my comprehensive basic education with a Bachelor of Science degree in Computer Science and a working experience that has included Business Development over the past 30+ years; I certainly am able to read and comprehend new knowledge enough to take a position of my own.
Hi @AweEnthusiast , I think you represent as well your ideas as an AWE school based on the practice of the kite and its combinations in networks, and from which we can get the best, starting with a complete occupation of a working space, as well as favoring a high power / weight aloft ratio.
John I seem to remember you being involved in some clean energy effort at some point in the past, but do not recall any details. (?)
Yes, Pierre. With JoeF and DaveS, we were considering a Kites-based AWE Basic school for envisaged early AWE entry jobs. Most of the materials are now in possession of Jalbert Aerology Laboratory of which DaveS is now CTO and I just got appointed as VP (Africa).
Below is an interesting piece therefrom:
**
> Kite Networks in relation to Mathematical Network Theory
**
Network Theory is well-developed branch of mathematics also known as Graph Theory. Computer Networks are the best-known application of Network Theory, but every field of science and engineering has its versions, from Condensed Matter Physics to Biological Networks, Transportation Networks, and so on. All these inform and enable Network Theory application in new domains.
Jalbert Aerology Lab (JAL) proposes the key to Airborne Wind Energy scaling is Kite Networks, just as Computer Networks are the dominant scaling paradigm of computing. In fact, every kite or computer is a basic network already, and Higher Topological Orders of many-connected units are the simply the only logical path to scale greatly, just as a higher organism is of necessity a network of cells. This is more than armchair daydream, given the Climate Endgame crisis. Kite Networks may be the key mitigating technology, and its mathematical identification absolutely critical.
Network Theory is noted for âlawsâ/theorems capturing general advantages of networking. Kite Networks are easily compared to the predictions of specific theorems to formally describe just what makes this such a fertile engineering-science and design paradigm. Kite Networks are readily classified according to Network Theory properties.
Metcalfe Network Effect- value increases by number
Kite Networks are classed as Spatial Networks of combined Topological and Geometric Order. Physical Chemistry domains of molecular orders, from crystallography to molecular biology have direct spatial analogs to Kite Networks. A Kite Train, for example is a spatial network chain topology like a polymer chain. In fact, a Kite Network is necessarily comprised of polymer networks in fractal dimensions. A Kite Network is a novel metamaterial phase of condensed matter (Kitematter).
A single kite is a primitive peer-to-peer network connection of kite and anchor. The first-generation concept of a Kite Farm is topologically a Star-Network with Earth as its Central Node linking to all Single-Kite Units. We begin to distinguish what sort of Kite Networks are Scale-free or not, whether Metcalfeâs Law or Beckstromâs Law applies to a given archetype, and so on. An early depiction of a possibly iconic form of Kite Network-
Scale-free is the property of scale variance across a network, like how a kite bridle may consist of various lengths of line segments. Golden Age German Weather-kite trains notably varied proportions of kite trains in a scale-free manner. Advanced Kite Networks tend to be even more scale-free than Classic Kite precedents like Trains, Arches, and Meshes, especially at network edges and across multi-layers.
Effective Kite Network Theory increasingly reifies various abstract complex properties, like rotation in phase-space of oscillations. Thus, each unit-sail (kixel) can steer crosswind pumping cycles without geometric pivoting, but merely by rotating axes-of-tilt (strike and dip in geospatial terms). Similarly, the large State-Space of a Kite Network is an abstraction, as the Network only physically occupies one state at a time.
Advanced Kite Networks exchange state and control information across interconnections aloft, enabling a single control thread to coordinate a large number of units (a Beckstrom Network Effect). Below see WPâs example of Network Control in terms of Tensor Math in graphical and matrix forms. The vector graph is quite recognizable as the sort of representation used for unit-kites. In effect, a unit-network aggregates many units, marginally- or non-tractable, into one unit, maximally tractable.
Network controllability - Wikipedia
Kite Networks have two primary superposed flow, energy of wind-to-polymer phonons and embodied state-information.
Network flow problem - Wikipedia
Theory starting to be reduced to practice-
Each sail has its own DOFs rigged. Both collective and independent motions are supported.
Misc Notes-
-
Unit-sail scaling limit is operational, ~1000m2, the practical limit where ground handling damages kite fabric by abrasion of too much packed mass.
-
Hobby Kite Network Records have long achieved many thousands of interconnected unit-kites.
-
Train Kites add lift in multiple stages vertically, much like a multi-stage rocket.
-
Arch Kites extend unit-count horizontally.
-
Train x Arch scaling define a maximal crosswind harvesting plane.
-
Provisional Patent filing (open participation for final submission)-
(4) (PDF) Advanced Kite Networks (researchgate.net)
Here is another, @tallakt
Researchers Ask: Does Enforcing Civility Stifle Online Debate? (undark.org)
The conclusion:
That is the goal. See also the FAQ. You could make the argument that we [1] donât do that enough, or do it inconsistently, but that would then be an argument for more moderation.
[1] The we here is aspirational.
Hello John: My honest impression has been that these two guys have been taking advantage of using your name for well over a decade now.
My observation is they like to posture and talk big, about improbably-huge, yet undefined, âkite installationsâ, saying things like they have a concept that will produce TeraWatts, and will somehow use kites to spin the same generators currently installed at huge coal plants, never touching on any details as to how they would power such a generator, or how an intermittent and variable drive source like wind could even match to a generator designed to run at a constant speed and load level.
In other words, everything coming from this direction is pretty-much complete nonsense, leading nowhere. The whole âJalbert Aerology Labsâ theme is just their latest âexcuseâ for spewing more nonsense. In this case they seek to, once again, capitalize on someone elseâs name, as though naming one more person will suddenly result in a more powerful wind energy system than anyone has ever conceived, while they continue to be unable to generate even the tiniest amount of symbolic power.
One of their latest âbreakthroughsâ was putting a self-winding watch on a kite and noting that the movement supposedly served to wind the watch. I have never even heard of such a weak and pathetic excuse for a demonstration of any wind energy concept, yet it was presented in a completely serious context. Where is that âbreakthroughâ today? What happened?
Yes they kept telling us that âJohnâ is the âpresident pro-temâ of their multi-letter abbreviation of an âorganizationâ, however my impression was it was all just more empty talking points. Like for one thing, the âpro-temâ (temporary) position went on for over a decade, why call it pro-tem? And what has this âorganizationâ ever done? Anything?
The other thing was it seemed to me the only use they had for even saying they HAD an organization seemed to be to say they were countering some European organization that was somehow not including them. I canât think of any actual activity or results attained by their âorganizationâ. To me, it is all just posturing and empty talk. Hard to imagine why, really. What do they have to gain by it? Why bother, if they just donât know what they are doing? Why not just admit they canât come up with anything? What happened to the âBose-Einstein Condensatesâ and all the other supposed theoretical breakthroughs? Did they guys just get bored with those talking points and now they want everyone to fall down in amazement of their new empty talking points?
Also I think they like to substitute JUST empty talk and meaningless theoretical, âtopologicalâ, and mathematical âtheoriesâ for any results whatsoever, ever. They actually declare they will not use power meters! They say it will be up to others to prove the veracity of their âtheoriesâ. You canât make this stuff up!
As with using you, they like to substitute the mere ânamingâ of certain people, having supposed âpositionsâ (you, for example) or âWayneâ who was claimed to have had some high up research position (was it "Director of Research?) at Boeing, when in reality it looked like Wayne was never employed by Boeing at all and had simply participated in some kite club that Boeing had somehow sponsored or partially encouraged in some way.
We catch them in these false statements all the time, and they never admit anything, and never change their tune, just keep going on, pretending they are the cutting edge, and everyone better watch out because ânext weekâ or at some nebulous future time, the world will appreciate their vast genius and unprecedented electrical output, but meanwhile they decry the use of power meters at all.
Personally, and sorry to say, but I just do not think there is any validity to the complicated mathematical stuff in your post. Just more gibberish from the same old people. I do not think any of it will ever produce a single Watt of power, and I do not think any of the âJalbertâ stuff has any place in wind energy, nor do I think it will ever lead anywhere whatsoever. That is my opinion, after over a decade of suffering their nonstop nonsense.
These people have proven their inability to participate in wind energy for well over a decade now, and I would advise you to maybe try to see that they are just pulling you into their false-trail talking-point war-of-empty-words on common sense.
@Windy_Skies
I consider this post a direct assault on the integrity of folks unable to defend themselves here. Itâs grossly misleading and unfair.
@dougselsam , If something is beyond your comprehension, the honorable thing is to acknowledge your ignorance and not disparage the authors for your lack of understanding. When you do not comprehend what another is saying, the speaker seems a âbabblerâ but to those who understand, he speaks perfect sense.
Perhaps you are mistaken about the real Wayne German being referred to by JoeF and DaveS.
I told you before and I must repeat it here that if you held the same credentials as DaveS in Aeronaytics, Robotics and Kiting, then I will consider you competent enough a judge on these matters.
It is such disputations from the ignorant that irks and brings about âincivilitiesâ.
It takes humility to learn from others.
Hello John,
Below is what a Provisional Application for Patent is:
A filing date will be accorded to a provisional application only when it contains a written description of the invention, complying with all requirements of 35 U.S.C. §112(a).
What is the filing date, please?
To be complete, a provisional application must also include the filing fee as set forth in 37 CFR 1.16(d) and a cover sheet* identifying:
- the application as a provisional application for patent;
- the name(s) of all inventors;
- inventor residence(s);
- title of the invention;
- name and registration number of attorney or agent and docket number (if applicable);
- correspondence address; and
- any U.S. Government agency that has a property interest in the application.
So âopen participation for final submissionâ looks to not be possible.
The AKN document has been widely discussed in the current forum. It is not a patent, nor is it a provisional patent. It is not a document explaining how wind energy is converted. It is nothing like what it claims. And it is not understandable, nor coherent.
However I think you can develop some AWE concepts based on kite-school, and you can do it by yourself, without using huge terms with capital letters (Higher Topological Orders, and so on) which are not yours, without claiming false claims which are not yoursâŚ
Best regards