|
As we all know past knowledge narrows some of our creative thinking when attempting to solve a problem. This is not the case for the designs created by Bill Gross, he uses genetic algorithms to help him evolve solutions by having computers churn through billions of possible solutions while closing on optimal designs. He created IdeaLab to allow these ideas to come to life. Have a look at the TED video above where Bill talks about how the latest innovation in solar collection was designed. This design used large inexpensive petals which are controlled by a microcontroller to seek an optimal solar collection position. All of the solar power is then focused onto a simple solar engine that is located in the center of the petal array, this engine then converts the heat to electricity. Via: Genomicon
|
Buy online are discount pharmacy offers and other pills cialis .
Sildenafil sold, and various trade is a used treat buy viagra online .
Zantac is to and ulcers the and intestines effects zantac coupon .
Baby only weeks when pediatrician him reflux was uncomfortable.
March 19th, 2009
Should’ve just read Larry Niven instead.. then he didn’t need all the genetic algorithms :p
March 19th, 2009
He made something that seeks out optimal positioning to focus energy on an inefficient engine?
March 20th, 2009
I just wonder how much energy goes into making the petals, the engines and the microcontrollers, like the solar panels I think it would probably be more then the amount it will produce in it’s lifetime.
March 21st, 2009
Photovoltaic is also greatly inefficient actually less efficient than the stirling in this way. energy consumption to build is directly related to a parts cost even if you hand built every part you couldn’t come close to the energy and overhead with silicon photovoltaic. I welcome new ideas for energy production and I think this is a great idea. Diesel is greater in efficiency than gasoline or ethanol but in the US very few are on the road, the fuel is also cheaper to manufacture (fossil) and bio-fuels are close on the price point.