4 ms·

what? if you agree that such a device can't work, how can that "news article" NOT be a hoax?

by cracki 17y ago

jhancock 17y ago
"hoax - something intended to deceive; deliberate trickery intended to gain an advantage" I know we all like to think that every 18 year old Nepali kid has at least a master's in electrical engineering and a PhD in materials science. However, It could simply be they are 18 year old kids and are wrong. I have seen no evidence of fraud.
- jacquesm 17y ago
  Wrong, misguided or they talked themselves in to a tight spot and it got a lot tighter because of the media. Hard to tell which without more information.
  - pbhjpbhj 17y ago
    Father (bursting in):Son what are you doing shaving your balls with my electric razor ...?!?! Son: Err ... Father: Well. Son: It's for school, err, ... I'm making a hair powered solar cell. Father: Really? Wow ... I always told your mother you were a great kid.
- craighyatt 17y ago
  Here's the evidence of fraud: 1. "I'm trying to produce commercially and distribute to the districts. We've already sent a couple out to the districts to test for feasibility." means they have built and distributed prototypes for evaluation. 2. "Two teens in Nepal, Milan Karki and Harihar Adhikari, have developed a low cost solar panel from human hair. Silicon dioxide, cupreous oxide, copper wire, glass, plywood and black hair is all they required to prepare the solar panel." a cupreous oxide (US spelling cuprous oxide) cell produces 2.35 mW per square meter and they would need a panel 120m x 120m to produce 9V at 18W. 3. Their panel is just about the right size to contain a commercially available 9V 18W unit which can be purchased from a company like Maplin in the UK. 4. If they have distributed panels that supposedly produce 9V at 18W and the panels are the size shown in the photogrqaphs, this could only happen if they have concealed conventional silicon solar panels inside the prototypes. Either that or they haven't distributed any prototypes. 5. Based on the information published so far, including direct quotes from the inventors, these students do not understand the science behind their own invention.
  - craighyatt 17y ago
    I meant 1.25 mW per square meter.
tlb 17y ago
A hoax implies deliberate fraud. Many scientific theories turn out to be wrong, but are not hoaxes. Newtonian mechanics or the Bohr atom model, for example.
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
- lutorm 17y ago
  This was not the case of a theory being wrong. He's making the case that the device they show can not possibly have the characteristics the makers claim. And it's hard to say that's not deliberate. At a minimum grossly negligent. The experiments that lead to the development of Newtonian mechanics (the Copernican laws, for example) are still valid. It's just their interpretation that has changed.

what? if you agree that such a device can't work, how can that "news article" NOT be a hoax?

by cracki 17y ago

what? if you agree that such a device can't work, how can that "news article" NOT be a hoax?

"hoax - something intended to deceive; deliberate trickery intended to gain an advantage" I know we all like to think that every 18 year old Nepali kid has at least a master's in electrical engineering and a PhD in materials science. However, It could simply be they are 18 year old kids and are wrong. I have seen no evidence of fraud.

jacquesm 17y ago
Wrong, misguided or they talked themselves in to a tight spot and it got a lot tighter because of the media. Hard to tell which without more information.
- pbhjpbhj 17y ago
  Father (bursting in):Son what are you doing shaving your balls with my electric razor ...?!?! Son: Err ... Father: Well. Son: It's for school, err, ... I'm making a hair powered solar cell. Father: Really? Wow ... I always told your mother you were a great kid.
craighyatt 17y ago
Here's the evidence of fraud: 1. "I'm trying to produce commercially and distribute to the districts. We've already sent a couple out to the districts to test for feasibility." means they have built and distributed prototypes for evaluation. 2. "Two teens in Nepal, Milan Karki and Harihar Adhikari, have developed a low cost solar panel from human hair. Silicon dioxide, cupreous oxide, copper wire, glass, plywood and black hair is all they required to prepare the solar panel." a cupreous oxide (US spelling cuprous oxide) cell produces 2.35 mW per square meter and they would need a panel 120m x 120m to produce 9V at 18W. 3. Their panel is just about the right size to contain a commercially available 9V 18W unit which can be purchased from a company like Maplin in the UK. 4. If they have distributed panels that supposedly produce 9V at 18W and the panels are the size shown in the photogrqaphs, this could only happen if they have concealed conventional silicon solar panels inside the prototypes. Either that or they haven't distributed any prototypes. 5. Based on the information published so far, including direct quotes from the inventors, these students do not understand the science behind their own invention.
- craighyatt 17y ago
  I meant 1.25 mW per square meter.

tlb 17y ago

A hoax implies deliberate fraud. Many scientific theories turn out to be wrong, but are not hoaxes. Newtonian mechanics or the Bohr atom model, for example.

deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
lutorm 17y ago
This was not the case of a theory being wrong. He's making the case that the device they show can not possibly have the characteristics the makers claim. And it's hard to say that's not deliberate. At a minimum grossly negligent. The experiments that lead to the development of Newtonian mechanics (the Copernican laws, for example) are still valid. It's just their interpretation that has changed.